P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Not the “handle” - the signature line that BB used to have is gone, it wasn’t very charitable. It bothered me and I’m Catholic.
If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic? - 2
- Status
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
When a signature profile is modified, it affects even old posts.
U
uncle_adolf
Guest
Q.)“If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic?”
A)The Catholic church’s actions in secular and religious history.
As an Orthodox believer, let me help you understand:
The Catholic church’s actions in religious history:
I was just thinking about St. John Chrysostom when I saw your message. It brought to mind a bit of history
This is an account of the sack of Constantinople, carried out by Catholics against the Orthodox.
buzzle.com/editorials/11-28-2004-62230.asp
. "How shall I begin to tell of the deeds wrought by these nefarious men ! Alas, the images, which ought to have been adored, were trodden under foot ! Alas, the relics of the holy martyrs were thrown into unclean places ! Then was seen what one shudders to hear, namely, the divine body and blood of Christ was spilled upon the ground or thrown about. They snatched the precious reliquaries, thrust into their bosoms the ornaments which these contained, and used the broken remnants for pans and drinking cups,-precursors of Antichrist, authors and heralds of his nefarious deeds which we momentarily expect. Manifestly, indeed, by that race then, just as formerly, Christ was robbed and insulted and His garments were divided by lot; only one thing was lacking, that His side, pierced by a spear, should pour rivers of divine blood on the ground.
Nor can the violation of the Great Church[11] be listened to with equanimity. For the sacred altar, formed of all kinds of precious materials and admired by the whole world, was broken into bits and distributed among the soldiers, as was all the other sacred wealth of so great and infinite splendor.
When the sacred vases and utensils of unsurpassable art and grace and rare material, and the fine silver, wrought with gold, which encircled the screen of the tribunal and the ambo, of admirable workmanship, and the door and many other ornaments, were to be borne away as booty, mules and saddled horses were led to the very sanctuary of the temple. Some of these which were unable to keep their footing on the splendid and slippery pavement, were stabbed when they fell, so that the sacred pavement was polluted with blood and filth.
shsu.edu/~his_ncp/1204.html
Of course, if you want something more modern, the rememberance of what happenend to the Orthodox in Croatia during the second world war, under the Catholic regime then in power.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usta%C5%A1e
Here are some 'secular tid-bits as well:
"…a front page story about the recent scathing grand jury report incriminating priests, and providing evidence of cover up by many high ranking officials The jist of the article , called Faith strong despite scandal, was that “Area Catholics are angry, but some call the idea of leaving the church unfathomable.” Many Catholics, the article stated, are disappointed, and even mad, but with a faith in God that is still strong, many would never think of leaving the Catholic Church.
I’ve got news for the many Catholics in the world. The Catholic Church, not to mention other churches as well, has had scandal and blood on its hand since its beginning. This recent sex abuse scandal is just another in a long line of embarrassing and illegal atrocities of men who call themselves Christian, and “men of God.”
Remember the Crusades? Remember the Inquisition? Remember the silence and even support of Hitler? Remember the many peoples conquered by the Catholic Church in the name of God? And now, think of the many children abused by the Catholic Church.
(Thanks for returning the remains of St. John Chrysostom that were stolen from us… Better late than never, eh?
So,perhaps the question should really be:
"If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you being a Catholic?
A)The Catholic church’s actions in secular and religious history.
As an Orthodox believer, let me help you understand:
The Catholic church’s actions in religious history:
I was just thinking about St. John Chrysostom when I saw your message. It brought to mind a bit of history
This is an account of the sack of Constantinople, carried out by Catholics against the Orthodox.
buzzle.com/editorials/11-28-2004-62230.asp
. "How shall I begin to tell of the deeds wrought by these nefarious men ! Alas, the images, which ought to have been adored, were trodden under foot ! Alas, the relics of the holy martyrs were thrown into unclean places ! Then was seen what one shudders to hear, namely, the divine body and blood of Christ was spilled upon the ground or thrown about. They snatched the precious reliquaries, thrust into their bosoms the ornaments which these contained, and used the broken remnants for pans and drinking cups,-precursors of Antichrist, authors and heralds of his nefarious deeds which we momentarily expect. Manifestly, indeed, by that race then, just as formerly, Christ was robbed and insulted and His garments were divided by lot; only one thing was lacking, that His side, pierced by a spear, should pour rivers of divine blood on the ground.
Nor can the violation of the Great Church[11] be listened to with equanimity. For the sacred altar, formed of all kinds of precious materials and admired by the whole world, was broken into bits and distributed among the soldiers, as was all the other sacred wealth of so great and infinite splendor.
When the sacred vases and utensils of unsurpassable art and grace and rare material, and the fine silver, wrought with gold, which encircled the screen of the tribunal and the ambo, of admirable workmanship, and the door and many other ornaments, were to be borne away as booty, mules and saddled horses were led to the very sanctuary of the temple. Some of these which were unable to keep their footing on the splendid and slippery pavement, were stabbed when they fell, so that the sacred pavement was polluted with blood and filth.
- Nay more, a certain harlot, a sharer in their guilt, a minister of the furies, a servant of the demons, a worker of incantations and poisonings, insulting Christ, sat in the patriarch’s seat, singing an obscene song and dancing frequently. B’or, indeed, were these crimes committed and others left undone, on the ground that these were of lesser guilt, the others of greater. But with one consent all the most heinous sins and crimes were committed by all with equal zeal. Could those, who showed so great madness against God Himself, have spared the honorable matrons and maidens or the virgins consecrated to God? Nothing was more difficult and laborious than to soften by prayers, to render benevolent, these wrathful barbarians, vomiting forth bile at every unpleasing word, so that nothing failed to inflame their fury. Whoever attempted it was derided as insane and a man of intemperate language. Often they drew their daggers against any one who opposed them at all or hindered their demands.
shsu.edu/~his_ncp/1204.html
Of course, if you want something more modern, the rememberance of what happenend to the Orthodox in Croatia during the second world war, under the Catholic regime then in power.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usta%C5%A1e
Here are some 'secular tid-bits as well:
"…a front page story about the recent scathing grand jury report incriminating priests, and providing evidence of cover up by many high ranking officials The jist of the article , called Faith strong despite scandal, was that “Area Catholics are angry, but some call the idea of leaving the church unfathomable.” Many Catholics, the article stated, are disappointed, and even mad, but with a faith in God that is still strong, many would never think of leaving the Catholic Church.
I’ve got news for the many Catholics in the world. The Catholic Church, not to mention other churches as well, has had scandal and blood on its hand since its beginning. This recent sex abuse scandal is just another in a long line of embarrassing and illegal atrocities of men who call themselves Christian, and “men of God.”
Remember the Crusades? Remember the Inquisition? Remember the silence and even support of Hitler? Remember the many peoples conquered by the Catholic Church in the name of God? And now, think of the many children abused by the Catholic Church.
(Thanks for returning the remains of St. John Chrysostom that were stolen from us… Better late than never, eh?
So,perhaps the question should really be:
"If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you being a Catholic?
E
emeraldcoast
Guest
Hi ibkc,Thank you for your concern, Emeraldcoast. I pray to St. Monica only to ask her to pray for me. I don’t pray to her to worship her. But again, thank you for your concern. If you like, I will add you to my prayers for conversion.
I love having friends pray for me and as my sister in Christ, I would love to have you pray for me. Conversion? Hmm…I suppose that you are talking about me converting to the Catholic Church…Well, I do like to play Bingo!
In all honesty, I will ask you to pray for me that I continue to grow in Christ’s love. I am a Christian, whose relationships with God and God’s people grow richer and stronger with consistency and commitment through prayer and reflection. I have accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior, but I am always in need of God’s grace and prayer from others since I do fall short.Just a side note - would you find it offensive if I ask you if I could pray for your conversion to my church, the church that nurtures my relationship with the Lord towards a true personal relationship? My church is a true spiritual blessing for my family and teaches that all those that are baptised are welcome to the Lord’s Supper and that all those who are faithful are “saints of God”. I would like to pray for the continued growth of your own personal relationship with God and that He continues to bless you and your family…
Thank you for you prayers - God Bless!
U
uncle_adolf
Guest
What could you expect? The old saying is:
“like master, like man”:
Pope Nicholas I (858-867)
With Pope Nicholas I (in office 858-867) we have another example of how low the holder of the papal office could stoop to enforce the primacy of the Roman church over the rest of Christendom. It all started with a collection of document known as the “Pseudo Isidorian Decretals”. It was claimed that the documents were collected by St. Isidore of Seville (d.636). Part of the collection contains letters purportedly written by the ante-Nicene popes, beginning with Clement (in office:88-97). The collection was suppose to prove that from the earliest days the Church of Rome had the right to issue laws, validate council decisions and depose bishops. These documents are known today to be forgeries. They were actually deceitfully composed by the Frankish Court around the year 850.
Nicholas I, an ardent campaigner for papal supremacy seized on this chance. In his arguments with Hincmar (c806-882), archbishop of Rheims, he cited the Decretals, claiming to have ancient copies of them. It was obvious that Nicholas lied, for the forgery was only less than two decades old then! The Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, together with the Donation of Constantine, played very influential roles in the historical establishment of papal supremacy.
Pope John XII (955-964)
The next pope on our list, John XII (in office 955-964) was the person who initiated the tradition of changing names upon elevation to the throne*, his name being Octavian. Surely, the protesting Catholic reader will say, a person whose actions became tradition in the papacy must be good. Wrong!
John XII was one of the most notorious popes in history. The illegitimate son of Alberic II, the prince of Rome (c905-954), and the grandson of the infamous Marozia, his addiction to sex and all forms of hedonistic pleasures were well known. Contemporary gossip had him turning the Lateran palace into a brothel. He went after every female form he could find. He was reputed to have slept with his niece, his father’s ex-lover and even his own mother! He died the way he lived; from a heart attack while making love to a married woman.
His political imbecility and lack of honesty can be seen in his dealing with Otto I (912-973), King of Germany. After soliciting Otto’s help against the rulers of North Italy, John crowned Otto in AD962 as the first emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. John was not entirely happy with Otto and tried to betray him by conspiring with Otto’s enemy, Berenger II (d.963), king of Italy. Angered by this, Otto had John deposed in 963. Leo VIII (in office 963-965) was chosen as John’s replacement. But the deposed pope was not to be so easily defeated. Once Otto was out of Rome, John removed Leo from the papal office and reestablish himself as the pope. Leo manage to escape, but his supporters were savagely treated by John’s men; they were either executed or badly maimed. John conveniently died when Otto was on his way back to Rome to punish this errant pope.
Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503)
The next pope, Alexander VI (in office 1492-1503) is without a doubt the most infamous pope in history. Alexander, born Rodrigo Borgia, was appointed to the lucrative post as vice-chancellor of the papal curia by his uncle, Pope Callistus III in 1457. The appointment enabled him to amassed such wealth that he quickly became one of the two most richest cardinals in the church. Rodrigo ensured his election to the papacy by bribing cardinals with money and promises of appointment to lucrative posts upon his ascending the papal throne.
Alexander, both before and after he became pope had countless number of mistresses through which he fathered at least ten children. One of his mistresses, Guilia Farnese was sixteen years old and married to another man when he became he lover. Guilia remained as Alexander’s live-in mistress throughout the pontificate. Through his affair with the Roman aristocrat Vannoza dei Cattanei, he had four children. Two of them, son Cesare and daughter Lucrezia, had a special relationship with him. It is very likely that Lucrezia was sexually available to both Alexander and Cesare. Historians still argue among themselves whether Lucrezia’s child was Alexander’s or Cesare’s. Once, Cesare threw aparty for the Pope where there were fifty of Rome’s finest prostitutes dancing naked at the papal table."
Alexander, true to the time honored papal tradition, practiced nepotism. He had his son Cesare made a cardinal at the age of eighteen. He also made the brother of Guilia, Alessandro Farnese, a cardinal, at her insistence. He also made his nephew, Juan Borgia-Lanzol, a cardinal. For his daughter, Lucrezia, he arranged many marriages to rich and important people.
Alexander applied many different methods to raise the necessary amount of money to further his family’s political ambitions. One was by assassinations followed by seizures of the victim’s property. Another was by selling the office of cardinals to the highest bidder. He was also a keen practitioner of simony. He once sold to a nobleman the right or permission to commit incest with his sister for 24,000 gold pieces.
To his enemies, Alexander showed very little mercy. When the Dominican monk Savondrola (1452-1498) denounced his moral behavior, Alexander had him excommunicated, tortured and then burned at the stake as a heretic. Alexander was also, at least, an inactive participator in the murder of his son-in-law Alfonso (Lucrezia’s husband) by Cesare Borgia. Alexander died, very probably, from mistakenly taking the poison prepared by him and his son for a cardinal.
“like master, like man”:
Pope Nicholas I (858-867)
With Pope Nicholas I (in office 858-867) we have another example of how low the holder of the papal office could stoop to enforce the primacy of the Roman church over the rest of Christendom. It all started with a collection of document known as the “Pseudo Isidorian Decretals”. It was claimed that the documents were collected by St. Isidore of Seville (d.636). Part of the collection contains letters purportedly written by the ante-Nicene popes, beginning with Clement (in office:88-97). The collection was suppose to prove that from the earliest days the Church of Rome had the right to issue laws, validate council decisions and depose bishops. These documents are known today to be forgeries. They were actually deceitfully composed by the Frankish Court around the year 850.
Nicholas I, an ardent campaigner for papal supremacy seized on this chance. In his arguments with Hincmar (c806-882), archbishop of Rheims, he cited the Decretals, claiming to have ancient copies of them. It was obvious that Nicholas lied, for the forgery was only less than two decades old then! The Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, together with the Donation of Constantine, played very influential roles in the historical establishment of papal supremacy.
Pope John XII (955-964)
The next pope on our list, John XII (in office 955-964) was the person who initiated the tradition of changing names upon elevation to the throne*, his name being Octavian. Surely, the protesting Catholic reader will say, a person whose actions became tradition in the papacy must be good. Wrong!
John XII was one of the most notorious popes in history. The illegitimate son of Alberic II, the prince of Rome (c905-954), and the grandson of the infamous Marozia, his addiction to sex and all forms of hedonistic pleasures were well known. Contemporary gossip had him turning the Lateran palace into a brothel. He went after every female form he could find. He was reputed to have slept with his niece, his father’s ex-lover and even his own mother! He died the way he lived; from a heart attack while making love to a married woman.
His political imbecility and lack of honesty can be seen in his dealing with Otto I (912-973), King of Germany. After soliciting Otto’s help against the rulers of North Italy, John crowned Otto in AD962 as the first emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. John was not entirely happy with Otto and tried to betray him by conspiring with Otto’s enemy, Berenger II (d.963), king of Italy. Angered by this, Otto had John deposed in 963. Leo VIII (in office 963-965) was chosen as John’s replacement. But the deposed pope was not to be so easily defeated. Once Otto was out of Rome, John removed Leo from the papal office and reestablish himself as the pope. Leo manage to escape, but his supporters were savagely treated by John’s men; they were either executed or badly maimed. John conveniently died when Otto was on his way back to Rome to punish this errant pope.
Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503)
The next pope, Alexander VI (in office 1492-1503) is without a doubt the most infamous pope in history. Alexander, born Rodrigo Borgia, was appointed to the lucrative post as vice-chancellor of the papal curia by his uncle, Pope Callistus III in 1457. The appointment enabled him to amassed such wealth that he quickly became one of the two most richest cardinals in the church. Rodrigo ensured his election to the papacy by bribing cardinals with money and promises of appointment to lucrative posts upon his ascending the papal throne.
Alexander, both before and after he became pope had countless number of mistresses through which he fathered at least ten children. One of his mistresses, Guilia Farnese was sixteen years old and married to another man when he became he lover. Guilia remained as Alexander’s live-in mistress throughout the pontificate. Through his affair with the Roman aristocrat Vannoza dei Cattanei, he had four children. Two of them, son Cesare and daughter Lucrezia, had a special relationship with him. It is very likely that Lucrezia was sexually available to both Alexander and Cesare. Historians still argue among themselves whether Lucrezia’s child was Alexander’s or Cesare’s. Once, Cesare threw aparty for the Pope where there were fifty of Rome’s finest prostitutes dancing naked at the papal table."
Alexander, true to the time honored papal tradition, practiced nepotism. He had his son Cesare made a cardinal at the age of eighteen. He also made the brother of Guilia, Alessandro Farnese, a cardinal, at her insistence. He also made his nephew, Juan Borgia-Lanzol, a cardinal. For his daughter, Lucrezia, he arranged many marriages to rich and important people.
Alexander applied many different methods to raise the necessary amount of money to further his family’s political ambitions. One was by assassinations followed by seizures of the victim’s property. Another was by selling the office of cardinals to the highest bidder. He was also a keen practitioner of simony. He once sold to a nobleman the right or permission to commit incest with his sister for 24,000 gold pieces.
To his enemies, Alexander showed very little mercy. When the Dominican monk Savondrola (1452-1498) denounced his moral behavior, Alexander had him excommunicated, tortured and then burned at the stake as a heretic. Alexander was also, at least, an inactive participator in the murder of his son-in-law Alfonso (Lucrezia’s husband) by Cesare Borgia. Alexander died, very probably, from mistakenly taking the poison prepared by him and his son for a cardinal.
U
uncle_adolf
Guest
Pope John X (914-928)
Marozia’s mother, Theodora, was not to be outdone by her daughter in their family game of papal sexual roulette. Theodora had her lover elected as Pope John X (in office: 914-928; died 929). The reason she made him pope, according to a contemporary source, was to have him close by to continue their trysts! Apart from his love affair with Theodora, the most memorable thing about John X was that he actually made, for political expediency, the son of a count an archbishop. The count’s son was only five years old at that time! John’s fatal mistake came from one of his acts of political expediency. He persuaded Theodora to marry off Marozia to Alberic of Tuscany, whose family was beginning to gain political clout. Marozia had ideas of her own though, she married Alberic and then, very probably, egged him on the take on the pope. Alberic was routed. John then made Marozia look at the mutilated corpse of her husband. It was something she would never forgive her mother’s lover for. For when Theodora died in 928, Marozia had John X imprisoned and finally ordered him to be suffocated the next year
Pope Paul III (1534-1549)
When Alessandro Farnese was a cardinal he earned the nickname “cardinal petticoat” due to the fact that his sister Guilia was the mistress of Pope Alexander VI. From Alexander, Alessandro must have learnt a lot, for when he became Pope Paul III (in office 1534-1549) he seemed to be emulating his sister’s late lover in his nepotism, corruption and immorality. A clear cut example of his nepotism is the appointment of two of his grandsons, then only fourteen and sixteen years old respectively, to cardinals in 1534
Pope Julius III (1550-1555)
Paul’s successor Pope Julius III (in office 1550-1555) was another typical Renaissance pope; a lover of pleasure, a glutton and a heavy gambler. As pope, Julius managed to create a scandal, even by the standards of the Renaissance popes, by becoming infatuated with a fifteen year old boy, Innocenzo, which he picked up in the streets of Parma. He showered the boy with gifts one of which was appointing him as a cardinal. All in all, Julius III had a laid back reign, spending most of his time in the hedonistic pursuit of carnal pleasures.
Time and space will not permit more., but there are very many examples.
Marozia’s mother, Theodora, was not to be outdone by her daughter in their family game of papal sexual roulette. Theodora had her lover elected as Pope John X (in office: 914-928; died 929). The reason she made him pope, according to a contemporary source, was to have him close by to continue their trysts! Apart from his love affair with Theodora, the most memorable thing about John X was that he actually made, for political expediency, the son of a count an archbishop. The count’s son was only five years old at that time! John’s fatal mistake came from one of his acts of political expediency. He persuaded Theodora to marry off Marozia to Alberic of Tuscany, whose family was beginning to gain political clout. Marozia had ideas of her own though, she married Alberic and then, very probably, egged him on the take on the pope. Alberic was routed. John then made Marozia look at the mutilated corpse of her husband. It was something she would never forgive her mother’s lover for. For when Theodora died in 928, Marozia had John X imprisoned and finally ordered him to be suffocated the next year
Pope Paul III (1534-1549)
When Alessandro Farnese was a cardinal he earned the nickname “cardinal petticoat” due to the fact that his sister Guilia was the mistress of Pope Alexander VI. From Alexander, Alessandro must have learnt a lot, for when he became Pope Paul III (in office 1534-1549) he seemed to be emulating his sister’s late lover in his nepotism, corruption and immorality. A clear cut example of his nepotism is the appointment of two of his grandsons, then only fourteen and sixteen years old respectively, to cardinals in 1534
Pope Julius III (1550-1555)
Paul’s successor Pope Julius III (in office 1550-1555) was another typical Renaissance pope; a lover of pleasure, a glutton and a heavy gambler. As pope, Julius managed to create a scandal, even by the standards of the Renaissance popes, by becoming infatuated with a fifteen year old boy, Innocenzo, which he picked up in the streets of Parma. He showered the boy with gifts one of which was appointing him as a cardinal. All in all, Julius III had a laid back reign, spending most of his time in the hedonistic pursuit of carnal pleasures.
Time and space will not permit more., but there are very many examples.
E
Elric
Guest
Thanks mate.
I cant understand that way of thinking, especally when they disagree with something like authority and infalability. It makes little sense.
Its a bit like people who call themselves catholic, but only go to church at christmas and easter.
U
uncle_adolf
Guest
…the capture and pillage of the Christian bastion of Constantinople by the members of the Fourth Crusade in 1204
. The subsequent dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire weakened Christendom in the Near East and created an animousity between Catholics and Orthodox which has lasted into the 20th century.
Below are excerpts of sources dealing with the crusaders siezure and looting of the largest city in Christendom.
… a description from Robert of Clari of the sermons given by the Latin bishops before the final attack on Constantinople, in which they justified attacking other Christians.
“…LXXII. When the pilgrims saw this, they were very angry and grieved much; they went back from the other side of the harbor to their lodgings. When the barons had returned and had gotten ashore, they assembled and were much amazed, and said that it was on account of their sins that they did not succeed in anything and could not capture the city. Meanwhile the bishops and the clergy in the army debated and decided that the war was a righteous one, and that they certainly ought to attack the Greeks. For formerly the inhabitants of the city had been obedient to the law of Rome and now they were disobedient, since they said that the law of Rome was of no account, and called all who believed in it Ad dogs.” And the bishops said that for this reason one ought certainly to attack them, and that it was not a sin, but an act of great charity.
LXXIII. Then it was announced to all the host that all the Venetians and every one else should go and hear the sermons on Sunday morning; and they did so. Then the bishops preached to the army, the bishop of Soissons, the bishop of Troyes, the bishop of Havestaist master Jean Faicette and the abbot of Loos, and they showed to the pilgrims that the war was a righteous one; for the Greeks were traitors and murderers, and also disloyal, since they had murdered their rightful lord, and were worse than Jews. Moreover, the bishops said that, by the authority of God and in the name of the pope, they would absolve all who attacked the Greeks. Then the bishops commanded the pilgrims to confess their sins and receive the communion devoutly; and said that they ought not to hesitate to attack the Greeks, for the latter were enemies of God. They also commanded that all the evil women should be sought out and sent away from the army to a distant place. This was done; the evil women were all put on a vessel and were sent very far away from the army.
shsu.edu/~his_ncp/1204.html
. The subsequent dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire weakened Christendom in the Near East and created an animousity between Catholics and Orthodox which has lasted into the 20th century.
Below are excerpts of sources dealing with the crusaders siezure and looting of the largest city in Christendom.
… a description from Robert of Clari of the sermons given by the Latin bishops before the final attack on Constantinople, in which they justified attacking other Christians.
“…LXXII. When the pilgrims saw this, they were very angry and grieved much; they went back from the other side of the harbor to their lodgings. When the barons had returned and had gotten ashore, they assembled and were much amazed, and said that it was on account of their sins that they did not succeed in anything and could not capture the city. Meanwhile the bishops and the clergy in the army debated and decided that the war was a righteous one, and that they certainly ought to attack the Greeks. For formerly the inhabitants of the city had been obedient to the law of Rome and now they were disobedient, since they said that the law of Rome was of no account, and called all who believed in it Ad dogs.” And the bishops said that for this reason one ought certainly to attack them, and that it was not a sin, but an act of great charity.
LXXIII. Then it was announced to all the host that all the Venetians and every one else should go and hear the sermons on Sunday morning; and they did so. Then the bishops preached to the army, the bishop of Soissons, the bishop of Troyes, the bishop of Havestaist master Jean Faicette and the abbot of Loos, and they showed to the pilgrims that the war was a righteous one; for the Greeks were traitors and murderers, and also disloyal, since they had murdered their rightful lord, and were worse than Jews. Moreover, the bishops said that, by the authority of God and in the name of the pope, they would absolve all who attacked the Greeks. Then the bishops commanded the pilgrims to confess their sins and receive the communion devoutly; and said that they ought not to hesitate to attack the Greeks, for the latter were enemies of God. They also commanded that all the evil women should be sought out and sent away from the army to a distant place. This was done; the evil women were all put on a vessel and were sent very far away from the army.
shsu.edu/~his_ncp/1204.html
U
uncle_adolf
Guest
Involvement of Croatian Catholic clergy with the Ustaša regime
Involvement of Croatian Catholic clergy with the Ustaša regime refers to the role of the Croatian Catholic Church in the Independent State of Croatia (NDH), founded by the Ustaše in 1941 as a Nazi puppet state. The Catholic hierarchy in Croatia never broke its ties with the Ustaše regime. During this time, the most senior-ranking member of the Croatian clergy was archbishop Aloysius Stepinac of the Croatian metropolitan see in Zagreb. With forced conversions on one hand and condemnations of the Ustaše atrocities on the other, the involvement of the clergy is still a controversial chapter in the history of the Catholic Church in Croatia.
Initial Church position
In 1941 the Independent State of Croatia was established by the Ustaša puppet regime with Ante Pavelić as its leader (Poglavnik). The Independent State of Croatia was one of several Nazi puppet states. The Ustaša regime pursued a genocidal policy against the Serbs (who were Eastern Orthodox Christians), Jews and Roma. The senior Wehrmacht officer in Zagreb, General Edmund Glaise-Horstenau protested against the senseless killings by the Ustaše, as did the German diplomat in SE Europe, Hermann Neubacher.
The creation of the Independent State of Croatia was welcomed by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church and by many Catholic priests. In the aftermath of the declaration of independence on April 10, 1941, leading churchmen viewed the rise of the Independent State of Croatia in the context of a rebirth of a Catholic regime intent on following what they viewed as Christ’s laws. At first Stepinac was an active supporter of the Ustaša regime headed by Ante Pavelic, praying for the well-being of the puppet state.
During World War II a number of Croatian Catholic priests, not only cooperated with the regime but were implicated in murders and forced religious conversions of Serbs and Jews.
In a few cases the whole population of villages was killed because they were Serb Orthodox; conversely, there have been cases where villagers were superficially converted and remained alive. There were cases of local involvement in genocide, including Friar Majstorović who was expelled from the Franciscan Order on April 28, 1942. Petesic. Katolicko svecenstvo u NOB-u 1941-1945.
According to Dr. Mišić, the Bishop of Mostar, even newly-converted Serbs were rounded up and murdered:
“While the newly-converted are at Mass they seize them, old and young, men and women, and hunt them like slaves. From Mostar and Chapljina the railway carried six waggons full of mothers, girls, and children under eight to the station of Surmanci, where they were taken out of the waggons, brought into the hills and thrown alive, mothers and children, into deep ravines. In the parish of Klepca seven hundred schismatics from the neighbouring villages were slaughtered. The Sub-Prefect of Mostar, Mr Bajitch, a Mosle
m, publicly declared (as a state employee he should have held his tongue) that in Ljublina alone 700 schismatics have been thrown into one pit.(Mishitch, cited in Butler, 1956).”
During the 1961 trial of Adolf Eichmann, Alexander Arnon (secretary of the Jewish Community in Zagreb) testified about the treatment of Jews in Yugoslavia during the war. Alexander Arnon’s testimony included the following:
“Q. One more question: I am not sure that I heard correctly when you said that in one camp hundreds of thousands of Serbs were exterminated?
A. Hundreds of thousands.
Q. In what year was that?
A. Beginning in 1941, and until the end.”
Q. And who killed them?
A. The Ustashi.
Involvement of Croatian Catholic clergy with the Ustaša regime refers to the role of the Croatian Catholic Church in the Independent State of Croatia (NDH), founded by the Ustaše in 1941 as a Nazi puppet state. The Catholic hierarchy in Croatia never broke its ties with the Ustaše regime. During this time, the most senior-ranking member of the Croatian clergy was archbishop Aloysius Stepinac of the Croatian metropolitan see in Zagreb. With forced conversions on one hand and condemnations of the Ustaše atrocities on the other, the involvement of the clergy is still a controversial chapter in the history of the Catholic Church in Croatia.
Initial Church position
In 1941 the Independent State of Croatia was established by the Ustaša puppet regime with Ante Pavelić as its leader (Poglavnik). The Independent State of Croatia was one of several Nazi puppet states. The Ustaša regime pursued a genocidal policy against the Serbs (who were Eastern Orthodox Christians), Jews and Roma. The senior Wehrmacht officer in Zagreb, General Edmund Glaise-Horstenau protested against the senseless killings by the Ustaše, as did the German diplomat in SE Europe, Hermann Neubacher.
The creation of the Independent State of Croatia was welcomed by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church and by many Catholic priests. In the aftermath of the declaration of independence on April 10, 1941, leading churchmen viewed the rise of the Independent State of Croatia in the context of a rebirth of a Catholic regime intent on following what they viewed as Christ’s laws. At first Stepinac was an active supporter of the Ustaša regime headed by Ante Pavelic, praying for the well-being of the puppet state.
During World War II a number of Croatian Catholic priests, not only cooperated with the regime but were implicated in murders and forced religious conversions of Serbs and Jews.
In a few cases the whole population of villages was killed because they were Serb Orthodox; conversely, there have been cases where villagers were superficially converted and remained alive. There were cases of local involvement in genocide, including Friar Majstorović who was expelled from the Franciscan Order on April 28, 1942. Petesic. Katolicko svecenstvo u NOB-u 1941-1945.
According to Dr. Mišić, the Bishop of Mostar, even newly-converted Serbs were rounded up and murdered:
“While the newly-converted are at Mass they seize them, old and young, men and women, and hunt them like slaves. From Mostar and Chapljina the railway carried six waggons full of mothers, girls, and children under eight to the station of Surmanci, where they were taken out of the waggons, brought into the hills and thrown alive, mothers and children, into deep ravines. In the parish of Klepca seven hundred schismatics from the neighbouring villages were slaughtered. The Sub-Prefect of Mostar, Mr Bajitch, a Mosle
m, publicly declared (as a state employee he should have held his tongue) that in Ljublina alone 700 schismatics have been thrown into one pit.(Mishitch, cited in Butler, 1956).”
During the 1961 trial of Adolf Eichmann, Alexander Arnon (secretary of the Jewish Community in Zagreb) testified about the treatment of Jews in Yugoslavia during the war. Alexander Arnon’s testimony included the following:
“Q. One more question: I am not sure that I heard correctly when you said that in one camp hundreds of thousands of Serbs were exterminated?
A. Hundreds of thousands.
Q. In what year was that?
A. Beginning in 1941, and until the end.”
Q. And who killed them?
A. The Ustashi.
I
ibkc
Guest
I appreciate that, especially on behalf of my husband, who is resisting Christianity (ANY kind of Christianity) using every and any excuse he can come up with.
U
uncle_adolf
Guest
Catholic Bishop Alois Hudal
Catholic Bishop Alois Hudal was rector of the Pontificio Istituto Teutonico Santa Maria dell’Anima in Rome, a seminary for Austrian and German priests, and “Spiritual Director of the German People resident in Italy”. After the end of the war in Italy, Hudal became active in ministering to German-speaking prisoners of war and internees then held in camps throughout Italy. In December 1944 the Vatican Secretariat of State received permission to appoint a representative to “visit the German-speaking civil internees in Italy”, a job which was assigned to Hudal.
Hudal used this position to aid the escape of wanted Nazi war criminals, including Franz Stangl, commanding officer of Treblinka, Gustav Wagner, commanding officer of Sobibor, Alois Brunner, responsible for the Drancy internment camp near Paris and in charge of deportations in Slovakia to German concentration camps, and Adolf Eichmann — a fact about which he was later unashamedly open.
Some of these wanted men were being held in internment camps: generally without identity papers, they would be enrolled in camp registers under false names. Other Nazis were in hiding in Italy, and sought Hudal out as his role in assisting escapes became known on the Nazi grapevine
In his memoirs Hudal said of his actions: “I thank God that He [allowed me] to visit and comfort many victims in their prisons and concentration camps and to help them escape with false identity papers.”
If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you being a Catholic?
I am afraid no one will answer this question. To do so, you would have to refute the facts I have presented.
Catholic Bishop Alois Hudal was rector of the Pontificio Istituto Teutonico Santa Maria dell’Anima in Rome, a seminary for Austrian and German priests, and “Spiritual Director of the German People resident in Italy”. After the end of the war in Italy, Hudal became active in ministering to German-speaking prisoners of war and internees then held in camps throughout Italy. In December 1944 the Vatican Secretariat of State received permission to appoint a representative to “visit the German-speaking civil internees in Italy”, a job which was assigned to Hudal.
Hudal used this position to aid the escape of wanted Nazi war criminals, including Franz Stangl, commanding officer of Treblinka, Gustav Wagner, commanding officer of Sobibor, Alois Brunner, responsible for the Drancy internment camp near Paris and in charge of deportations in Slovakia to German concentration camps, and Adolf Eichmann — a fact about which he was later unashamedly open.
Some of these wanted men were being held in internment camps: generally without identity papers, they would be enrolled in camp registers under false names. Other Nazis were in hiding in Italy, and sought Hudal out as his role in assisting escapes became known on the Nazi grapevine
In his memoirs Hudal said of his actions: “I thank God that He [allowed me] to visit and comfort many victims in their prisons and concentration camps and to help them escape with false identity papers.”
If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you being a Catholic?
I am afraid no one will answer this question. To do so, you would have to refute the facts I have presented.
U
uncle_adolf
Guest
http://www.goosemoose.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/15224/20hitlercatholicchurch.jpg
Hitler attending Catholic Church
Hitler rightly saw the Concordat with the Vatican as representing papal endorsement of the Nazi regime. Catholic bishops in Germany welcomed the concordat. As long as the deutschmarks came into the church’s coffers and schools (which Hitler ensured right through to the end of World War II), then the imprisonment in concentration camps of anti-Nazi political opponents (who were Reds, after all), the persecution of Jews (who were Christ-killers, after all) and the suppression of trade unions, parliamentary democracy and civil rights (all part of the “Red Tide”) would go unchallenged.
Indeed, the Catholic Church welcomed, and willingly implemented, those Nazi policies which were in harmony with Catholic church’s own anti-Semitism. When a 1.5% quota was introduced for Jews in schools and colleges, Catholic priests supplied “blood purity” information from church marriage and baptism registries to the government. Church records were also used to determine Jewish ancestry for the Nazi policy prohibiting the employment of Jews in the civil service. This assistance to the Nazi state would ultimately connect with the death camps when the price of being a Jew was not just exclusion from education or employment but death
http://www.goosemoose.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/15224/21hitlercardinal.jpg
Hitler and Cardinal
http://www.goosemoose.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/15224/28priestssalutehitler.jpg
Catholic Priests salute Hitler
Hitler attending Catholic Church
Hitler rightly saw the Concordat with the Vatican as representing papal endorsement of the Nazi regime. Catholic bishops in Germany welcomed the concordat. As long as the deutschmarks came into the church’s coffers and schools (which Hitler ensured right through to the end of World War II), then the imprisonment in concentration camps of anti-Nazi political opponents (who were Reds, after all), the persecution of Jews (who were Christ-killers, after all) and the suppression of trade unions, parliamentary democracy and civil rights (all part of the “Red Tide”) would go unchallenged.
Indeed, the Catholic Church welcomed, and willingly implemented, those Nazi policies which were in harmony with Catholic church’s own anti-Semitism. When a 1.5% quota was introduced for Jews in schools and colleges, Catholic priests supplied “blood purity” information from church marriage and baptism registries to the government. Church records were also used to determine Jewish ancestry for the Nazi policy prohibiting the employment of Jews in the civil service. This assistance to the Nazi state would ultimately connect with the death camps when the price of being a Jew was not just exclusion from education or employment but death
http://www.goosemoose.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/15224/21hitlercardinal.jpg
Hitler and Cardinal
http://www.goosemoose.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/15224/28priestssalutehitler.jpg
Catholic Priests salute Hitler
A
AntePavelic
Guest
Say, what happenend to the posts I was reading?
Everything just disappeared!
Lets see if I can reconstruct it.
If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic?
I was just thinking about St. John Chrysostom when I saw your message. It brought to mind a bit of history
This is an account of the sack of Constantinople, carried out by Catholics against the Orthodox.
buzzle.com/editorials/11-28-2004-62230.asp
. "How shall I begin to tell of the deeds wrought by these nefarious men ! Alas, the images, which ought to have been adored, were trodden under foot ! Alas, the relics of the holy martyrs were thrown into unclean places ! Then was seen what one shudders to hear, namely, the divine body and blood of Christ was spilled upon the ground or thrown about. They snatched the precious reliquaries, thrust into their bosoms the ornaments which these contained, and used the broken remnants for pans and drinking cups,-precursors of Antichrist, authors and heralds of his nefarious deeds which we momentarily expect. Manifestly, indeed, by that race then, just as formerly, Christ was robbed and insulted and His garments were divided by lot; only one thing was lacking, that His side, pierced by a spear, should pour rivers of divine blood on the ground.
Nor can the violation of the Great Church be listened to with equanimity. For the sacred altar, formed of all kinds of precious materials and admired by the whole world, was broken into bits and distributed among the soldiers, as was all the other sacred wealth of so great and infinite splendor.
When the sacred vases and utensils of unsurpassable art and grace and rare material, and the fine silver, wrought with gold, which encircled the screen of the tribunal and the ambo, of admirable workmanship, and the door and many other ornaments, were to be borne away as booty, mules and saddled horses were led to the very sanctuary of the temple. Some of these which were unable to keep their footing on the splendid and slippery pavement, were stabbed when they fell, so that the sacred pavement was polluted with blood and filth.
. Nay more, a certain harlot, a sharer in their guilt, a minister of the furies, a servant of the demons, a worker of incantations and poisonings, insulting Christ, sat in the patriarch’s seat, singing an obscene song and dancing frequently. B’or, indeed, were these crimes committed and others left undone, on the ground that these were of lesser guilt, the others of greater. But with one consent all the most heinous sins and crimes were committed by all with equal zeal. Could those, who showed so great madness against God Himself, have spared the honorable matrons and maidens or the virgins consecrated to God? Nothing was more difficult and laborious than to soften by prayers, to render benevolent, these wrathful barbarians, vomiting forth bile at every unpleasing word, so that nothing failed to inflame their fury. Whoever attempted it was derided as insane and a man of intemperate language. Often they drew their daggers against any one who opposed them at all or hindered their demands.
No one was without a share in the grief. In the alleys, in the streets, in the temples, complaints, weeping, lamentations, grief, the groaning of men, the shrieks of women, wounds, rape, captivity, the separation of those most closely united. Nobles wandered about ignominiously, those of venerable age in tears, the rich in poverty. Thus it was in the streets, on the corners, in the temple, in the dens, for no place remained unassailed or defended the suppliants. All places everywhere were filled full of all kinds of crime. Oh, immortal God, how great the afflictions of the men, how great the distress !"
shsu.edu/~his_ncp/1204.html
( Thanks for returning the remains of St. John Chrysostom that were stolen from us… Better late than never, eh?)
Of course, if you want something more modern, the rememberance of what happenend to the Orthodox in Croatia during the second world war, under the Catholic regime then in power.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustaše
Here are some secular tid-bits as well:
"…a front page story about the recent scathing grand jury report incriminating priests, and providing evidence of cover up by many high ranking officials The jist of the article , called Faith strong despite scandal, was that “Area Catholics are angry, but some call the idea of leaving the church unfathomable.” Many Catholics, the article stated, are disappointed, and even mad, but with a faith in God that is still strong, many would never think of leaving the Catholic Church.
I’ve got news for the many Catholics in the world. The Catholic Church, not to mention other churches as well, has had scandal and blood on its hand since its beginning. This recent sex abuse scandal is just another in a long line of embarrassing and illegal atrocities of men who call themselves Christian, and “men of God.”
Remember the Crusades? Remember the Inquisition? Remember the silence and even support of Hitler? Remember the many peoples conquered by the Catholic Church in the name of God? And now, think of the many children abused by the Catholic Church.
This is why I’m not Catholic.
Perhaps the question should really be:
"If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you being a Catholic?
(btw, Deleting posts of people you can’t answer hardly seems like honourable behaviour. Perhaps your arguments were iinsufficient?)
Everything just disappeared!
Lets see if I can reconstruct it.
If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic?
I was just thinking about St. John Chrysostom when I saw your message. It brought to mind a bit of history
This is an account of the sack of Constantinople, carried out by Catholics against the Orthodox.
buzzle.com/editorials/11-28-2004-62230.asp
. "How shall I begin to tell of the deeds wrought by these nefarious men ! Alas, the images, which ought to have been adored, were trodden under foot ! Alas, the relics of the holy martyrs were thrown into unclean places ! Then was seen what one shudders to hear, namely, the divine body and blood of Christ was spilled upon the ground or thrown about. They snatched the precious reliquaries, thrust into their bosoms the ornaments which these contained, and used the broken remnants for pans and drinking cups,-precursors of Antichrist, authors and heralds of his nefarious deeds which we momentarily expect. Manifestly, indeed, by that race then, just as formerly, Christ was robbed and insulted and His garments were divided by lot; only one thing was lacking, that His side, pierced by a spear, should pour rivers of divine blood on the ground.
Nor can the violation of the Great Church be listened to with equanimity. For the sacred altar, formed of all kinds of precious materials and admired by the whole world, was broken into bits and distributed among the soldiers, as was all the other sacred wealth of so great and infinite splendor.
When the sacred vases and utensils of unsurpassable art and grace and rare material, and the fine silver, wrought with gold, which encircled the screen of the tribunal and the ambo, of admirable workmanship, and the door and many other ornaments, were to be borne away as booty, mules and saddled horses were led to the very sanctuary of the temple. Some of these which were unable to keep their footing on the splendid and slippery pavement, were stabbed when they fell, so that the sacred pavement was polluted with blood and filth.
. Nay more, a certain harlot, a sharer in their guilt, a minister of the furies, a servant of the demons, a worker of incantations and poisonings, insulting Christ, sat in the patriarch’s seat, singing an obscene song and dancing frequently. B’or, indeed, were these crimes committed and others left undone, on the ground that these were of lesser guilt, the others of greater. But with one consent all the most heinous sins and crimes were committed by all with equal zeal. Could those, who showed so great madness against God Himself, have spared the honorable matrons and maidens or the virgins consecrated to God? Nothing was more difficult and laborious than to soften by prayers, to render benevolent, these wrathful barbarians, vomiting forth bile at every unpleasing word, so that nothing failed to inflame their fury. Whoever attempted it was derided as insane and a man of intemperate language. Often they drew their daggers against any one who opposed them at all or hindered their demands.
No one was without a share in the grief. In the alleys, in the streets, in the temples, complaints, weeping, lamentations, grief, the groaning of men, the shrieks of women, wounds, rape, captivity, the separation of those most closely united. Nobles wandered about ignominiously, those of venerable age in tears, the rich in poverty. Thus it was in the streets, on the corners, in the temple, in the dens, for no place remained unassailed or defended the suppliants. All places everywhere were filled full of all kinds of crime. Oh, immortal God, how great the afflictions of the men, how great the distress !"
shsu.edu/~his_ncp/1204.html
( Thanks for returning the remains of St. John Chrysostom that were stolen from us… Better late than never, eh?)
Of course, if you want something more modern, the rememberance of what happenend to the Orthodox in Croatia during the second world war, under the Catholic regime then in power.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustaše
Here are some secular tid-bits as well:
"…a front page story about the recent scathing grand jury report incriminating priests, and providing evidence of cover up by many high ranking officials The jist of the article , called Faith strong despite scandal, was that “Area Catholics are angry, but some call the idea of leaving the church unfathomable.” Many Catholics, the article stated, are disappointed, and even mad, but with a faith in God that is still strong, many would never think of leaving the Catholic Church.
I’ve got news for the many Catholics in the world. The Catholic Church, not to mention other churches as well, has had scandal and blood on its hand since its beginning. This recent sex abuse scandal is just another in a long line of embarrassing and illegal atrocities of men who call themselves Christian, and “men of God.”
Remember the Crusades? Remember the Inquisition? Remember the silence and even support of Hitler? Remember the many peoples conquered by the Catholic Church in the name of God? And now, think of the many children abused by the Catholic Church.
This is why I’m not Catholic.
Perhaps the question should really be:
"If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you being a Catholic?
(btw, Deleting posts of people you can’t answer hardly seems like honourable behaviour. Perhaps your arguments were iinsufficient?)
A
AntePavelic
Guest
Here’s a few more reasons why I’m not Catholic:
Here’s a few quotes for you, …
:“The Inquisition was a very merciful tribunal; I repeat it, almost a compassionate tribunal… A man was only allowed to be racked once, which no one can deny was a most wonderful leniency in those times.”
Catholic Mirror, official organ of Cardinal Gibbons, Aug. 29, 1896.
“The state cannot afford to permit religious liberty. We hear a great deal about religious tolerance, but we are only tolerant in so far as we are not interested. A person may be tolerant toward a religion if he is not religious… Intolerance means fervor and zeal. The best the state can do is to establish a limited religious liberty; but beyond a certain degree of tolerance the state cannot afford to admit the doctrine.”
Monsignor Russell (Catholic), quoted in the Washington Post, May 5, 1910.
“We confess that the Roman Catholic Church is intolerant; that is to say, that it uses all the means in its power for the extirpation of error and sin; but this intolerance is the logical and necessary consequences of her infallibility. She alone has the right to be intolerant, because she alone has the truth. The church tolerates heretics where she is obliged to do so, but she hates them mortally, and employs all her force to secure their annihilation.”
Shepherd of the Valley (Catholic), St. Louis, Mo. 1876.
The [Roman Catholic] doctrine which, from the very first origin of religious dissensions, has been held by all bigots of all sects, when condensed into few words and stripped of rhetorical disguises, is simple this: ‘I am in the right, and you are in the wrong. When you are the stronger, you ought to tolerate me; for it is your duty to tolerate truth. But when I am the stronger, I shall persecute you; for it is my duty to persecute error’."
Essay on “Sir James Mackintosh” by Lord Macaulay
He is a heretic who does not believe what the Roman Hierarchy teaches.” — (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).
“Heretics (those who are not members of the Catholic Church or who do not hold to Catholic doctrine) worship a God who is a liar, and a Christ who is a liar.” — St. Augustine, (quoted in “Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graca”, by Fr. J. P. Migne, Paris: 1866, 42:207).
“The church may by divine right confiscate the property of heretics, imprison their person, and condemn them to flames. In our age, the right to inflict the severest penalties, even death, belongs to the church. There is no graver offense than heresy, therefore it must be rooted out.” — Public Eccliastical, Vol. 2, p.142.
“A heretic merits the pains of fire…By the Gospel, the canons, civil law, and custom, heretics must be burned.” — the “Directory for the Inquisitors”.
“When confronted with heresy, she (Catholic Church) does not content herself with persuasion, arguments of an intellectual and moral order appear to her insufficient, and she has recourse to force, to corporal punishment, to torture.” — The Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris, H.M.A. Baudrillart, quoted in The Catholic Church, The Renassance, and Protestantism, p 182-183.
“Even if the Pope were Satan incarnate, we ought not to raise up our heads against him, but calmly lie down to rest on his bosom. He who rebels against our Father is condemned to death, for that which we do to him we do to Christ: we honor Christ if we honor the Pope; we dishonor Christ if we dishonor the Pope. I know very well that many defend themselves by boasting: “They are so corrupt, and work all manner of evil!” But God has commanded that, even if the priests, the pastors, and Christ-on-earth were incarnate devils, we be obedient and subject to them, not for their sakes, but for the sake of God, and out of obedience to Him".
” — St. Catherine of Siena, SCS, p. 201-202, p. 222, (quoted in Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 5: “The Book of Obedience”, Chapter 1: “There is No Salvation Without Personal Submission to the Pope”).
Please don’t be angry or condemn me for these quotes above, as they were NOT written by me, but by Catholics.
AntePavelic
Here’s a few quotes for you, …
:“The Inquisition was a very merciful tribunal; I repeat it, almost a compassionate tribunal… A man was only allowed to be racked once, which no one can deny was a most wonderful leniency in those times.”
Catholic Mirror, official organ of Cardinal Gibbons, Aug. 29, 1896.
“The state cannot afford to permit religious liberty. We hear a great deal about religious tolerance, but we are only tolerant in so far as we are not interested. A person may be tolerant toward a religion if he is not religious… Intolerance means fervor and zeal. The best the state can do is to establish a limited religious liberty; but beyond a certain degree of tolerance the state cannot afford to admit the doctrine.”
Monsignor Russell (Catholic), quoted in the Washington Post, May 5, 1910.
“We confess that the Roman Catholic Church is intolerant; that is to say, that it uses all the means in its power for the extirpation of error and sin; but this intolerance is the logical and necessary consequences of her infallibility. She alone has the right to be intolerant, because she alone has the truth. The church tolerates heretics where she is obliged to do so, but she hates them mortally, and employs all her force to secure their annihilation.”
Shepherd of the Valley (Catholic), St. Louis, Mo. 1876.
The [Roman Catholic] doctrine which, from the very first origin of religious dissensions, has been held by all bigots of all sects, when condensed into few words and stripped of rhetorical disguises, is simple this: ‘I am in the right, and you are in the wrong. When you are the stronger, you ought to tolerate me; for it is your duty to tolerate truth. But when I am the stronger, I shall persecute you; for it is my duty to persecute error’."
Essay on “Sir James Mackintosh” by Lord Macaulay
He is a heretic who does not believe what the Roman Hierarchy teaches.” — (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).
“Heretics (those who are not members of the Catholic Church or who do not hold to Catholic doctrine) worship a God who is a liar, and a Christ who is a liar.” — St. Augustine, (quoted in “Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graca”, by Fr. J. P. Migne, Paris: 1866, 42:207).
“The church may by divine right confiscate the property of heretics, imprison their person, and condemn them to flames. In our age, the right to inflict the severest penalties, even death, belongs to the church. There is no graver offense than heresy, therefore it must be rooted out.” — Public Eccliastical, Vol. 2, p.142.
“A heretic merits the pains of fire…By the Gospel, the canons, civil law, and custom, heretics must be burned.” — the “Directory for the Inquisitors”.
“When confronted with heresy, she (Catholic Church) does not content herself with persuasion, arguments of an intellectual and moral order appear to her insufficient, and she has recourse to force, to corporal punishment, to torture.” — The Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris, H.M.A. Baudrillart, quoted in The Catholic Church, The Renassance, and Protestantism, p 182-183.
“Even if the Pope were Satan incarnate, we ought not to raise up our heads against him, but calmly lie down to rest on his bosom. He who rebels against our Father is condemned to death, for that which we do to him we do to Christ: we honor Christ if we honor the Pope; we dishonor Christ if we dishonor the Pope. I know very well that many defend themselves by boasting: “They are so corrupt, and work all manner of evil!” But God has commanded that, even if the priests, the pastors, and Christ-on-earth were incarnate devils, we be obedient and subject to them, not for their sakes, but for the sake of God, and out of obedience to Him".
” — St. Catherine of Siena, SCS, p. 201-202, p. 222, (quoted in Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 5: “The Book of Obedience”, Chapter 1: “There is No Salvation Without Personal Submission to the Pope”).
Please don’t be angry or condemn me for these quotes above, as they were NOT written by me, but by Catholics.
AntePavelic
M
Memaw
Guest
btw, Deleting posts of people you can’t answer hardly seems like honourable behaviour. Perhaps your arguments were iinsufficient?)
Maybe they crawled back under the same rock you crawled out of.
Maybe they crawled back under the same rock you crawled out of.
A
AntePavelic
Guest
Thank you for your kind welcome.
I suppose that you, as a senior member of this forum, would be able to put forward the Catholic point of view in a good light with tact and ability.
As I have never had a theological / historical discusson with an actual Catholic,I was looking forward to hearing viewpoints
on various subjects, and mutual understanding, if not more.
Could you tell me, what it was that you found in my posts that caused you to lash out like that?
The statements I have included are not my own. They are historically accurate and correct, as far as I am able to
determine.
The majority of them are from Catholics.
if there are any problems with these statements, would you please point them out?
All these words I posted were said…
All the deeds they spoke of actually happended. It’s all true.
So, why to you choose to be angry because I point them out?
They won’t be anyless true tommorrow.
I answered the question put to me by this post, 'If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic? ’
honestly, and to the best of my ability.
So may I ask you this question: why are you Catholic ?
I guess in your own way, you have shown me this forum’s way of dealingling with difficulties.
Ignore the actual issues, and attack the person who asks questions.
I was hoping for something with a little more substance…
I do apologize if I have offended you in some way.
May God’s blessing go with you ever, and may his protection rest on you and your family.
.
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
AntePavelic,
Your profile says you’re Catholic and yet you obviously are not. And have stated that specifically in one of your posts.
So which was the lie? From your “manifesto” I’m guessing that the lie was the time you wrote in your profile that you were Catholic. So you lied to get in to “speak” with some very good people. And now you have the temerity to lecture anyone on good behavior? It seems just a bit hypocritical doesn’t it?
And yes perhaps you did not receive a warm welcome and ill treatment is not justified, but is it appropriate to come in with a Manifesto? Because that’s what you did. One that we have seen, in one form or another, before.
It may come as a shock to you, and perhaps you even thought you were being clever, but we find it tiresome to see this same sort of thing over and over. And I’m sure some have seen this sort of thing more often than I have, so if I find it tiresome then who knows how much worse it is for some others.
So have a care when you enter someone’s “house” and be a good guest also. Wouldn’t you agree it’s the Christian thing to do? What Would Jesus Do?
Your profile says you’re Catholic and yet you obviously are not. And have stated that specifically in one of your posts.
So which was the lie? From your “manifesto” I’m guessing that the lie was the time you wrote in your profile that you were Catholic. So you lied to get in to “speak” with some very good people. And now you have the temerity to lecture anyone on good behavior? It seems just a bit hypocritical doesn’t it?
And yes perhaps you did not receive a warm welcome and ill treatment is not justified, but is it appropriate to come in with a Manifesto? Because that’s what you did. One that we have seen, in one form or another, before.
It may come as a shock to you, and perhaps you even thought you were being clever, but we find it tiresome to see this same sort of thing over and over. And I’m sure some have seen this sort of thing more often than I have, so if I find it tiresome then who knows how much worse it is for some others.
So have a care when you enter someone’s “house” and be a good guest also. Wouldn’t you agree it’s the Christian thing to do? What Would Jesus Do?
G
GODHATESCATHS
Guest
The reason they protested is because the roman catholic church became a greed/power machine used to control the masses and stepped away from the fundamental Christian roots.Hello Singinbeauty,
Was this really necessary? My post (that you addressed here, post #12) was not addressed to you and it was well intended (post #12); and well received (post #14).
My posts here are based on my beliefs in the context that I am a Roman Catholic. In this setting, a Catholic forum, where Catholics and non-Catholics share their differences, there will obviously be disagreements. However, all properly Baptized Christians (including Catholics) are all “Brothers and Sisters in Christ”.
Generally speaking
It could be said that there exists a certian amount of “arrogance” and a “holier than thou” nature built into “Protestantism” itself. After-all, "Protestantism’ is the “protesting” of the Roman Catholic Church, the first Christian Church and the protesting of Christian doctrine and beliefs associated with the Early Church. This would mean that the persons responsible for "Protestantism” and all of the 36,000+ different denominations which followed, are displaying “arrogance” and a “holier than thou” attitude towards the denomination that they broke from.
Thank you for your post, you have given me some new ideas for some new threads.
God Bless You!
RCC realized that they had to reform to control the mass
good day
J
jimmy
Guest
This post is completely false. You should read the first seven ecumenical councils which call the Church Orthodox. Previous to the schism there was no official name for the Church. The Church was called Catholic, it was called Orthodox but these were not official names. It is only after the schism that official names were claimed by certain churches.
An Orthodox could easily reverse this and say that the name Catholic was adopted in the west to distinguish themselves from the Orthodox faith, the true faith.
J
jimmy
Guest
You have rejected the true faith. You no longer accept the word of God as it is but only through the lenses of your own eyes. You have distorted the truth to fit your own agenda which is nothing more than a hate for the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. Repent of this hate and return to the Church.
- Status