Persecution of non-Catholics

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I am Southern Baptist and I couple of months ago became interested in learning more about the Catholic Church and started reading any and everything i could get my hands on about her. I find myself being drawn more to the Church and am considering converting. In my journey I have encountered a few stumbling blocks, but have been able to move forward, due to much research and prayer! However I recently have hit a very LARGE stumbling block, and have not been given a way to get through it. THE REFORMATION. The things that I have read, from credible sources, about the horrible mistreatment, torture and murder of non-Catholic Christians, as well as non-belivers, by Church leaders. I know Church leaders are human and sinners as all people are, but I have actually read and heard representatives of the church actually DEFEND, these actions and the Churches Popes and Bishops of the time. I can not accept this. I KNOW it was WRONG! How can anyone find a defense for this? There are many things that I truly love about the Catholic Church and wholeheartedly belive, If you could offer any insight on this matter, I would really appreciate it.

In Christ- kedera

It can’t be defended, & it does not need to be. It is intolerable that evildoing should be defended as not being evil - evil in a good cause remains evil, and does not become good.​

Is Christ any less at work in the Church, because of the sins of His members ? I don’t see why that must be. ISTM that His grace takes full account of human wickedness, & is never overcome by it: He works for good, even through the evil that we do. That, ISTM, why the Church does not need to be an assembly of sinless & perfected Saints - because He is not overcome by our sins. If that is true - then we can apply it to those brutalities as well as to our own sins.

This does not mean that sin is any less sin - but it does mean that Christ cannot be thwarted by it.

That’s MO

 

[Kevin42]

I am not sure if anyone has posted this…but Pope John Paul II made over 100 public apologies during his time as Pope. These include:

The persecution of the Italian scientist and philosopher Galileo Galilei in the trial in 1633 (October 31, 1992).

Catholic involvement with the African slave trade (August 9, 1993).

The Church Hierarchy’s role in burnings at the stake and the religious wars that followed the Protestant Reformation (May 1995, in the Czech Republic).

The injustices committed against women in the name of Christ, the violation of women’s rights and for the historical denigration of women (July 10, 1995, in a letter to “every woman”).

Inactivity and silence of some Catholics during the Holocaust (March 16, 1998).

For the execution of Jan Hus in 1415 (December 18, 1999 in Prague). When John Paul II visited Prague in 1990s, he requested experts in this matter "to define with greater clarity the position held by Jan Hus among the Church’s reformers, and acknowledged that “independently of the theological convictions he defended, Hus cannot be denied integrity in his personal life and commitment to the nation’s moral education.” It was another step in building a bridge between Catholics and Protestants.

For the sins of Catholics throughout the ages for violating “the rights of ethnic groups and peoples, and [for showing] contempt for their cultures and religious traditions”. (March 12, 2000, during a public Mass of Pardons).

For the sins of the Crusader attack on Constantinople in 1204. (4 May 2001, to the Patriarch of Constantinople).

For missionary abuses in the past against indigenous peoples of the South Pacific (November 22, 2001, via the Internet).

For the massacre of Aztecs and other Mesoamericans by the Spanish in the name of the Church.

(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_john_paul_II#Apologies)

I think it is clear that the official Church is not trying to defend Her past sins, and has probably apologized for them. Of course there will be people within the Church who dont agree, but I think the Church has expressed Her sorrow very well.

 

[Greg27]

There were persecutions of non-Catholic Christians by Catholic mobs or by the Church itself. However, if people were accused by the Church of say, heresy, heresy trials (especially at the end of the medieval period) were done by a legal process. The trial of Galileo for example, never actually involved torture, and the accused was not simply strung up on a pole and burned or hanged right away. In the trial of Meister Eckhart for example, and even that of Margaret Porete (who was burned), both were given chances to repent of heresy even after their theological works had been carefully examined by competent authorities for theological or doctrinal error. Eckhart was better protected than Porete and simply died, though in more recent times his work has been re-examined and even if not free of heterodoxy, it seems clear Eckhart sincerely believed himself to be a faithful Catholic and preacher.

To put Eckhart in perspective though, while during the medieval period some theologians or philosophers had certain propositions or ideas condemned, Eckhart was the only Catholic theologian actually formally charged with heresy and brought to trial.

There were brutalities, particularly in things like the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, and to an extent in the Counter-Reformation, but these have often been exaggerated for polemical purposes. A number of excellent historical accounts of the Inquisition and Reformation exist, which show that highly inflated claims on the number of Protestants/Christians who died during things like the Counter-Reformation are false, and were in reality fairly low in numbers. During the ‘witch-hunts’ for example, probably no more than 50,000 people were actually executed, even when hysteria reached its greatest heights.

Another historical factor one needs to consider are the machinations of political forces and economic and social change. Henry the VIIth for example, used his schism from the Church to seize the wealth of ecclesial property (particularly monastaries) to bolster the Royal treasury. Likewise, many leaders, political or religious, used each other to further their own goals and ends, or to enrich and empower themselves. Removing or killing opponents and dissenters then certainly very often had political rather than religious motivations behind it, whether it was done by Catholics or Protestants.

In the end I think judgement needs to avoid absurd inflation of the numbers killed or persecuted to insanely high figures, sober and objective analysis and assessment of the historical facts, detailed analysis into the root causes of persecutions and balanced attribution of culpability or guilt, and an avoidance of anarchronism.

 

[richjaurigui]

LUCIFER REVOLTED AGAINST GOD

LUTHER REVOLTED AGAINST THE POPE and created his own religion ( protestantism ) and so began the slaughter of christian vs.protestant “christians”

Then Calvin said, I will create a “christian” religion too.

Then so and so said hey I will create a new “christian” religion also

Later King Henry VIII said 'I don’t need no pope, I will create my own “christian religion” too, so that I can sleep with as many woman as I want.

AND NOW WE HAVE MANY ‘‘CHRISTIAN’’ RELIGIONS…WHAT A MESS!

Boy! I’m blessed I did not fall for all these man-made “christian” religions AND INSTEAD STUCK WITH CHRIST AND PETER HIS ROCK!!!

 

[kaycee]

I suggest, before you get all worked up about Catholic persecution of APOSTATE CATHOLICS, which is what the “Reformers” and their followers WERE,
you might also first want to read up on how bloodthirsty and violent the “Reformers” themselves were.
Luther called for the forcible prevention of Catholics from performing their worship and pilgrimages,
Zwingli had the Anabaptists drowned in Lake Zurich,
Calvin persecuted those who didn’t agree with him, and had Michael Servetus roasted alive in Geneva (not merely burnt at the stake, he had the fires set many feet away from the stake so that Servetus would “cook” on the stake - alive - for several hours).
Luther also urged the massacres of over 200,000 German peasants who had rebelled against the princes AT HIS URGING, and Luther also viciously persecuted Jews.
Your Protestant Reformers were more violent than the Catholic leaders. And what they were doing was worse too, cuz the Catholics were just defending the Faith handed down from the Apostles while the Reformers were going after people who disagreed with their NOVEL interpretations of the Bible.
The Reformers were very sanguinary spirits, and that is usually not told to Protestants in their Sunday school lessons where the Reformers are presented as godly heroes.
Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

The reformers were not claiming infallibilty in faith and MORALS. The RCC makes that claim!

Not quite sure that torturing someone to change their beliefs is quite the morality that the Lord had in mind.

 

[amills]

The reformers were not claiming infallibilty in faith and MORALS. The RCC makes that claim!

Not quite sure that torturing someone to change their beliefs is quite the morality that the Lord had in mind.

Oops - seems like we have failed to give you enough information to understand the concept of infallibility. Infallibility has to do with official teaching. The Church does not claim that all of its members practice faith and morals according to the teachings.

You may want to try to find an official infallible teaching on faith and morals that supports the concept of torturing someone to change their belief. BTW you will not find it. So please keep the doctrine of infallibility in the context to which it applies. Please do not apply it to something totally unrelated.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

**The reformers were not claiming infallibilty in faith and MORALS. The RCC makes that claim! **

And she makes that claim truthfully, too.
Infallibility only applies to something dogmatic, not to everyday discussions or activities.

That the Reformers did not claim infallibility (i.e. absolute certainty divinely-given) for their NOVEL teachings makes THEIR violence toward those who disagreed with their NOVEL interpretations all the MORE reprehensible.

And besides, Luther said things that amounted to claims of infallibility. " I will have it so, I , the Doctor of Doctors, will have it so."

The Catholic Church does not believe in torture or persecution. Those things were done as a last resort when the Revolution was getting out of hand. And far, far, far FEWER people actually died or were tortured than you have probably been led to believe.
The BBC and The History Channel ran a documentary a couple of years ago proving that over the 300 year period when the Inquisition was active, fewer than 3,000 people were actually executed throughout Europe by the Inquisition (actually by the State). Good grief, more criminals than that were hanged across Europe in any given ten year peiod back in those days.
The Inquisition has been greatly exaggerated.

 

[kaycee]

Oops - seems like we have failed to give you enough information to understand the concept of infallibility. Infallibility has to do with official teaching. The Church does not claim that all of its members practice faith and morals according to the teachings.

You may want to try to find an official infallible teaching on faith and morals that supports the concept of torturing someone to change their belief. BTW you will not find it. So please keep the doctrine of infallibility in the context to which it applies. Please do not apply it to something totally unrelated.

Yes, I have seen the definition of “infallibility”, the application of which renders it essentially meaningless. Offcourse you wont find it in official teaching. I am sure it was just RC’s using their private interpretation of official church teaching that got them off track.

 

[VociMike]

Yes, I have seen the definition of “infallibility”, the application of which renders it essentially meaningless. Offcourse you wont find it in official teaching. I am sure it was just RC’s using their private interpretation of official church teaching that got them off track.

This is a constant quirk I witness among those who argue against the Catholic Church. They distort a teaching of the Church which they don’t believe in, and when we correct them they complain that the Church doesn’t really know what she teaches as well as they, the complainers, do.

The conversation essentially goes like this: “I don’t believe in Catholic teaching X, but if X were true, it wouldn’t work the way the Catholic Church says it does!”

 

[goofyjim]

If you ask me there has been persecution from both sides. All of it should cease and we should get along in peace.

 

[Big_Dave]

Kedera, I want to encourage you to continue your journey as you seek answers to your questions. Five years ago I was an evangelical christian. I thought the Catholic church was all tied up in false religion worshiped idols etc. Four years ago I began an internet search trying to see what the church was like beyond the Book of Acts. You see i was brought up in the AofG church and was trying to see if the Gifts of the Holy Spirit was active in the young church. At 20 yrs of age I turned to the Baptist Church. Well thank God for the Pentecostal Church!! Because of their doctrines I discovered the Catholic Church. I became a Catholic this past Easter Vigil. At 75 years of age no less. What peace and joy flooded my soul as I was able to recieve Christ in the Eucharist!! It was my belief in the Real Presence that sent me over to the Catholic Church. Praise God. I had been Southern Baptist and Conservative Baptist. I love my evangelical churches because they gave me a good foundation on the Scriptures. Because I knew God’s Word so well I was astounded when I found that the Catholic Church and her teaching can be proven by the Bible. In fact the Bible made more sence to me once I began reading the Catachism. I know this has been jumping all over the place but I am so excited for you. What a journey that RCIA was for me!! The strength you will recieve when you begin recieving communion!! It is wonderful beyond words. My story is so much longer, so much more to tell. I will be praying for you as you explore the Catholic Faith.

Dave

 

[Victorious]

But when I read that Pope Pius XII “stood in the blood of the victims and didn’t say a word” and then I hear MODERN DAY Catholic Church represenatives defending him and the actions of the clergy, it’s more than a little unsettling.

Begging your pardon, but I happen to absolutely love Pope Pius XII, and it raises my hackles every time I hear or see that calumny. Pius XII was not a Nazi collaborator nor a participant in the Holocaust; he was in fact one of the few world leaders to condemn Nazism and to take concrete action on behalf of the Jews of Europe. He is credited with saving the lives of as many as 860,000 Jews during the Nazi terror. Among other things, he ordered monasteries and cloisters to open their doors to Jewish refugees, hid Jews in the Vatican and Castel Gandolfo, and personally intervened to stop deportations, particularly from Rome and from Hungary. And the Nazis didn’t think too much of their alleged lapdog: Hitler plotted to kidnap Pius XII in 1943.

In short, Pope Pius XII was a man of great moral and even physical courage. What you are repeating is a lie hatched by the KGB. Please cut it out.

Here are two books you need to read:

The Myth of Hitler’s Pope, by Rabbi David Dalin.

Crown of Glory: The Life of Pope Pius XII, by Alden Hatch (a Protestant) and Seamus Walsh.

 

[amills]

Yes, I have seen the definition of “infallibility”, the application of which renders it essentially meaningless. Offcourse you wont find it in official teaching. I am sure it was just RC’s using their private interpretation of official church teaching that got them off track.

So now are you saying you knew the meaning of infallible and then deliberately made a post that misapplied it in order to slander the church?

That wasn’t very nice…

 

[Mike_Brick]

Yes, I have seen the definition of “infallibility”, the application of which renders it essentially meaningless. Offcourse you wont find it in official teaching. I am sure it was just RC’s using their private interpretation of official church teaching that got them off track.

Kaycee, you are on a roll today with 27 posts by 8:00 p.m. Is sarcasm your “Gift”?

 

[kedera]

I really like ya’ll! All this passion! Victorious, don’t getcha drawls all in a twist, I made a boo-boo! Kaycee, you remind me of…me, passion is a good thing, but I have a way of getting over-excited, when I feel that my true, and solid ideas are attacked and I take everything personally! I am working on that… And Big_Dave, thank you so much, encouragement is always welcome.I am the daughter of a SB Deacon, who very devoted to his service of Christ and our church. Most of my family is for that matter. It is hard sometimes to have conversation now, especially w/my dad in matters of faith, an area where we have had some of our most memorable conversations. I know that It will probably only get more difficult, and I really don’t want them to take any of this personally, but I know they will. I just can’t ignore the work that God is doing in my heart. So thank you Dave.

Rich, first of all, you most likely are a cradle Catholic, so you are probably not all that responsible for your being Catholic, that would be your parents, same as me. Logically speaking we usually begin in the religion of our parents, or at least thats how it goes in my neighborhood. And It’s really not very nice of you to say that LUCIFER founded my religion of birth. I know many, very devout protestant people. LUCIFER has had influence through out history on people of EVERY denomination. We are all children of God, down to the most detestable, rancid humanbeings in existance. This being said, that means that even the worst of the worst are desired and called by God to come to him. K!

 

[Mimi]

richjaurigui;2437143**:

LUCIFER

REVOLTED AGAINST GOD

LUTHER REVOLTED AGAINST THE POPE and created his own religion ( protestantism ) and so began the slaughter of christian vs.protestant “christians”

Then Calvin said, I will create a “christian” religion too.

(snip)QUOTE]

And Kedera wrote, in part:
And It’s really not very nice of you to say that LUCIFER founded my religion of birth.

Kedera, sweetie, I think perhaps you misread those two names, similar though they may look. :hypno: I’ve done that myself! :blushing:

Thanks for starting this thread; it’s interesting.

God bless,

Mimi
(Cradle Catholic, re-vert; dh converted 2 yrs ago)

 

[Mike_Brick]

I really like ya’ll! All this passion!..I just can’t ignore the work that God is doing in my heart. So thank you Dave… K!

Kedera: You might check out a website called the Micah Project, which was formed by Michael Cumbie, (mikecumbie.org/)), formerly a So. Baptist, then Pentacostal Pastor, then a Charismatic Episcopalian Priest who is now Catholic. Cumbie’s stated mission is to lower or possibly help remove the wall between Protestants and Catholics. He is very passionate about his ministry, but is also humerous in his approach to the issues which seem to divide us. Michael also shares some very helpful insights into Christian worship. For example he talks about when he first entered a Catholic Church, where he found the center of the sanctuary was devoted to Jesus, while in his experience in non-catholic churches the preacher was the center of the worship experience.

I am a cradle Catholic, married for the past 39 years to a So. Baptist, who’s father was a preacher! She still remains Baptist, but is Catholic, but with a small “c” for now. For most of our married life we attended both churches, but now she attends mass with me in a new Catholic parish in our town where the pastor is a dynamic preacher himself. In other Catholic churches over the years she always said to me, you have the Eucharist when you go to mass, but I have to get something from the sermon, (again that’s the center of her worship experience, which in reality is only a bible study not very much actual worship of God).

Interestingly, thank God, our differences have made us both better Christians. She has made a lot of progress once she really understood Catholic doctrine, and gave up on what other non-Catholics or fallen away Catholics incorrectly told her Catholics believe.

So be patient, don’t get hung-up on the less critical issues for now and trust the Holy Spirit to lead you.

May the Peace of Christ Be With You
Mike

 

[kedera]

Coming from where I am now, although I am considering Catholicism, I really don’t like when someone equivocates the religion I grew up in (Protestantism) with the rebelion of LUCIFER**** against God. Yes, yes… i know he didn’t say that Lucifer founded protestantism directly, but he clearly was trying to connect the two. Yes, they left the chuch, but I don’t think that it was LUTHERS original intention to run off and create a new religion. It’s just hurtful for anyone to say that about the Church I grew up and can came to love Christ through…

 

[BelFarfalla]

But when I read that Pope Pius XII “stood in the blood of the victims and didn’t say a word” and then I hear MODERN DAY Catholic Church represenatives defending him and the actions of the clergy, it’s more than a little unsettling.

A large part of the issue is that by what you have said here it is clear that a good part of the information you have apprenlty been reading is just wrong or so grossly twisted that it no longer tells the turth. This is of course no fault of yours and a very valid discussion topic for this forum.

I picked the abour quote about Pope Pius XII as a good example of the mistruths you have been taught.

Until a few months ago I participated in a very long (weeks long) discussion about Pope Pius XII. Until that point I too belived in all of the “Hitler’s Pope” untruths about him. I spent hours reading material on all sides of the discussion. Most compelling were the onces fo Jews themselves who held him their savior. I turned from a Catholic who was appauled by all I had read about Pope Pius XII in the past to one who is in awe of the man.

There is absolutely no turth in what you stated. Pope Pius XII fought Hitler from even before become Pope. As the papal embasdor to Germany and alter as Pope he issued mandates to all Catholics to not cooperate with Hitler and the Nazi’s. He used the assests of the CC to house, feed and care for thousands of Jews. There were thousands of Jews housed in his summer residence. The Vatican was used to hide Jews.

I’ll bet that the tings you read have never told you that he allowed for the issuance of false conversion papers to Jews. The CC even help quick classes for Jews so that they could answer basic questions if a Nazi interogated them. The CC also issued thousands of papers to Jews so that they could pass off as Catholic priests, Catholic school teachers etc. Then the CC gave these people the money and method for escaping Europe.

Until the 1960’s the world and the Jewish community world wide celebrated Pope Pius XII as a true hero of WWII. Then the Soviets paid a german play right to write a play with the basic intent of destroying the memory of Pope Pius XII. It worked beautifully. The anti-Pope Pius XII material you have read it based on that play.

Pope Pius XII is credited with saving the lives of about 800,000 Jews during WWII. He and the CC did more then all of the other secular and religious organizations in the world put together.

Now if the info you have read on Pope Pius XII is so distorted I can only wonder how distorted the info you have read on the other topics is. Please understand that I am not saying that the CC have never done things that were wrong, they have. But there is a huge amount of distorted and exagerated material out that that are passed off as valid sources.

 

[BelFarfalla]

religioustolerance.org/popeapo2.htm

this is the site that I ended up at before I posted the thread. I don’t know how I ended up there, but reading it made me feel like all that I have been reading about the past couple of months, might not be totally true and that scares me and I probably should not look online for anything important because you really don’t know what you are getting. And a couple of weeks ago on a EWTN program (by the way I L-O-V-E love that channel) there was a priest (he was blonde) talking about the Reformation and a Pope (?) of the time, and he was basically defending whoever it was, saying basically that history is inacurate and they are misunderstood, and really played down the severity of it all. I just want hear that the Catholic Church, today, feels badly about it, and that they wouldn’t try to justify, in any way the wrongdoing of the Church leaders of the past (notice I say Church Leaders, not the Church).

Do you now that on the turn of the meleniaum Pope John Paul II appologized to the world for all the disdeeds in the past of the Catholic Church? Before that he had visited Colorado and there he appologized to the American Indians for what some Catholics did to their ancestors.
I think that the CC just as protestants need to acknowledge the wrongs committed by some of our religious ancestors. We can only learn from it and prevent it from reoccuring if we do this.
What I protest against are the gross exagerations and out right lies that are spread. I’ve already mentioned the one about Pope Pius XII. Another is that while I agree that there were wrongs doen during the Inquisitions, what we were taught is so grossly exagerated that it hardly represents the truth. Modern historians who are not relying on the actual records of the Inquisition and not on rumors. The secular hitorians who are doing this work are now saying that entire number of people executed in about 400 years of the Inquisitions is aroung 3,000 – 6,000. At 6,000 that’s 15 persons a year. A good number of these people had committed violent crimes, hersy was far from the only thing they had done. Since I have not looked into all 3-6 thousands cases I cannot say that all were wrongly executed any more then I can say that all were rightly executed. I do think that burning them was horrible. This was the secular punishment.
By contrast the after England separated from the CC, they executed some 75,000 Catholics. Lutheran Germany burned about 40,000 as witches.