Fred, Bob, and Willard, and you can find them in the library.Ok, that’s fine; but what I am asking is which protestants have denied this? What are their names, and where can we read their denials of this?
That’s my whole point - I think that many repeat this kind of lie about Protestants when speaking about Luther, and his responses to the Catholic threats and persecutions against him.Fred, Bob, and Willard, and you can find them in the library.
Seriously, though, I don’t know.
They seem to be genuine and sincere Christian pilgrims, like myself, seeking to know truth, and to know God through our variant perspectives.
But I would bet that the Catholic Encyclopedia doesn’t rely on liars to make this claim.That’s my whole point - I think that many repeat this kind of lie about Protestants when speaking about Luther, and his responses to the Catholic threats and persecutions against him.
Just for the record, I find that most who do repeat these kinds of lies, are not liars themselves.
WHERE DID THEY MAKE THIS CLAIM?
Hasn’t there been a serious change in Catholic teaching on this. In the past it was taught that it was acceptable to use torture to extract confessions, but now it is taught that it is not acceptable.
In the Catholic Encyclopedia. Why do you ask?
You don’t need a “Catholic” qualification. Just read any scholarly biography of Luther, such as Bainton’s Here I Stand or Oberman’s Man Between God and the Devil or Brecht’s three-volume Martin Luther. It’s been well established that the earliest accounts do not have this little flourish, and it’s pretty well accepted that Luther didn’t actually say this.
Certainly. That’s why many Protestant churches celebrate “Reformation Day” as an alternative to Halowe’en, though they’d do better just to celebrate All Saints’ Day (including the saints of the Reformation), in my opinion.
As a church historian, I have to disagree. Accuracy matters. When I see people on either side (or some other side, such as a nonbeliever) distorting or exaggerating, I will call them on it and ask them to support their claims. I agree that toting up numbers on each side is pointless. However, if people are going to insist on doing it, I’m going to ask them to be accurate. And in the process I often discover that my own opinions are inaccurate, which is all to the good.
Several reasons, I guess. But the first one is that I want to read it for myself so that I can let the context and full meaning sink in a little better. I am not sure why no one is able or willing to just give me a clear reference for this alleged statement Luther made, with book and page number. I have no idea what to look for under the Catholic Encyclopedia, or any other Catholic publications. (I have tried). I thought that a Catholic who knows Catholic literature should be able to tell me a lot easier.
I’m not giving you the reference because I’m not willing to. I just thought you wanted the actual Protestant authors names who proved this wasn’t said. I don’t spend much time reading Church historical books by Protestant authors.Several reasons, I guess. But the first one is that I want to read it for myself so that I can let the context and full meaning sink in a little better. I am not sure why no one is able or willing to just give me a clear reference for this alleged statement Luther made, with book and page number. I have no idea what to look for under the Catholic Encyclopedia, or any other Catholic publications. (I have tried). I thought that a Catholic who knows Catholic literature should be able to tell me a lot easier.
Yes, you are correct. This is the passage from the article where the CE makes the claim:
Unfortunately, all the CE does is make the claim, it provides not one iota of evidence regarding it’s claim about Protestants who supposedly disproved Luther’s statement. As can be expected, the Catholic Encyclopedia portrays Luther in the most weird and fanatical sense possible. I think the author of this article was very biased. Unless I see proof of this claim in the CE; I will consider it as another one of many embellishments to add credence to lies about Protestants.
Latimer and Ridley were executed by Queen Mary, acting on her own initiative, not by an Inquision from Rome. No Inquisition ever operated in Great Britain.
Not sure where you’re getting your information from on this one (if it’s on the level of Latimer and Ridley, a la Foxe’s Book of Martyrs above, that pretty well speaks for itself), but I searched numerous online sources concerning Peter Pazmany, and I found nothing along the lines of what you describe. Yes, he was a Jesuit, and yes, he did convert many, but nothing about torture. And the Jesuit-led Counter-reformation in Hungary still has nothing to do with the Inquisition.
“Sent to the gallies”? Hungary was still using slave galleys in the 16th century? I though those went out with the Romans.
Cite?
There were numerous clashes between the Hussites and the secular rulers in Bohemia and elsewhere, and Pope Martin V did approve a crusade against the Hussites and Wycliffites; but still, neither one of these was an Inquisition.
With respect, from what I’ve been able to come up with using simple net searches in fifteen minutes does not lend any strength to the idea that Catholic Answers is the one in error. Perhaps you need to re-research your history a little.
Unfortunately, some of the posters at CAF have not done their proper research, and some of the facts on the inquisition are whitewashed to a certain extent. For example, there was one poster who claimed that people were never brought before the Inquisition for the offense of Greek Orthodoxy.
There are a lot of Catholic and nonCatholic posters alike who need to do their homework and check their facts before posting. I have always found the CAF materials, however, to be extremely credibile. If anyone finds an error, they should contact the CAF staff to have it corrected.
You’re urgining someone to research for you!
Yes, they should look on for themselves. I gave 2 links in Hungarian. Unfortuneately I don’t have the time to translate it, but still, it is fact.