Persecution of non-Catholics

[Axion]

The Reformation Leaders were actually not innocent parties at all…

1. MARTIN LUTHER
   Luther was well known for his hot temper, pride and violent language, rather than for his saintliness and humility. He called the Pope the “Antichrist” and even heaped abuse on fellow-reformers like Zwingli and Bucer who disagreed with him. He encouraged the German Princes to seize church property in return for protection for the Reformation. Along with others, he issued a licence permitting the Landgrave of Hesse to keep 2 wives simultaneously. However worse was to come. His language grew in violence:
   “If we punish thieves with the gallows . . . why do we not still more attack with every kind of weapon . . . these Cardinals, these Popes, and that whole abomination of the Romish Sodom . . . why do we not wash our hands in their blood?”
   PEASANTS REVOLT
   Inspired by the writings of Luther and others, which declared the Freedom of the Christian Man, and led by Thomas Muntzer, an ex-pupil of Luther’s, German peasants demanded to be freed from Serfdom, joining in the Great Peasants Revolt. They hoped for Luther’s support. But Luther owed his protection and high position to the German aristocrats. So instead, in a pamphlet entitled Against the Murderous Peasants, Luther told the princes and the nobility that it was right and lawful to slay at the first opportunity a rebellious person, “just as one must slay a mad dog.”
   He added:
   Let all who are able, cut them down, slaughter and stab them, openly or in secret, and remember that there is nothing more poisonous, noxious and utterly devilish than a rebel… For we are come upon such strange times that a prince may more easily win heaven by the shedding of blood than others by prayers.
   Urged on by their spiritual leader, the nobles and their armies suppressed the revolts with great savagery. Molten pitch and sulphur were poured upon the peasants. Some had their eyes gouged out. The bodies of 5,000 retreating peasants were hung from trees across the countryside. For the leaders of the rebels a special form of torture was devised where their flesh was torn off with red-hot pincers. In all more than 100,000 peasants were slain.
   Embittered with Luther, the German peasants named him Dr Lugner, or “Dr Liar” in English. The advance of Lutheranism in Germany stopped.
   GERMAN JEWS
   Luther was no less inflamatory with regard to the Jews, as seen in the following excerpts from his pamphlet: The Jews and Their Lies, (1543):
   “First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honour of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians…
   Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.
   Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them…
   Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb…
   Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let them stay at home
   I wish and I ask that our rulers who have Jewish subjects exercise a sharp mercy toward these wretched people, as suggested above, to see whether this might not help (though it is doubtful). They must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in, proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did in the wilderness, slaying three thousand lest the whole people perish. They surely do not know what they are doing; moreover, as people possessed, they do not wish to know it, hear it, or learn it. There it would be wrong to be merciful and confirm them in their conduct. If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs, so that we do not become partakers of their abominable blasphemy and all their other vices and thus merit God’s wrath and be damned with them.”
   The Jews were soon expelled from Luther’s native Saxony.

 

[Axion]

JOHN CALVIN
Calvin, known for his harsh theology, became the leading Reformer of Geneva, where he established a virtual theocracy which ruled every aspect of peoples’ lives.In the constitution he drew up for the city, the death penalty was laid down for blasphemy, heresy and witchcraft.

It did not take long for this to be applied. Within a few years fifty-eight sentences of death and seventy-six of exile took place in Geneva. Two examples:

1. James Gruet, was alleged to have posted a note which implied that Calvin should leave the city:
   He was at once arrested and a house to house search made for his accomplices. This method failed to reveal anything except that Gruet had written on one of Calvin’s tracts the words ‘all rubbish.’ The judges put him to the rack twice a day, morning and evening, for a whole month . . . He was sentenced to death for blasphemy and beheaded on July 26, 1547.
2. The Spanish Reformer Servetus had dared to criticize Calvin’s “Institutes of the Christian Religion” and began an angry correspondence with him. Calvin promised: “If he comes here and I have any authority, I will never let him leave the place alive.”
   Servetus visited Geneva on 13 August, 1553. The next day Calvin, who had seen him in church, had his critic arrested. Calvin drew up forty articles of charges concerning the nature of God, infant baptism, and the attacks on his own teaching. On August 20, 1553, Calvin wrote: “I hope that Servetus will be condemned to death”
   On October 26, the Council ordered that he be burned alive on the following day.
   Servetus took half an hour to die. Calvin noted: "'He showed the dumb stupidity of a beast . . . He went on bellowing . . . in the Spanish fashion: “Misericordias!” . .

In1554 Calvin wrote the treatise Against the Errors of Servetus, in which he tried to justify the execution: “Many people have accused me of such ferocious cruelty that (they allege) I would like to kill again the man I have destroyed. Not only am I indifferent to their comments, but I rejoice in the fact that they spit in my face.”

 

[Axion]

THOMAS CROMWELL
The Reformation in England was brought about largely by state power. This was undertaken at the instigation of King Henry Vlll. The story of Henry’s marriages and of his many cruelties is well-known. Yet it has been argued that Henry was not a Reformer at all - more a man greedy for a new wife and to get his hands on the wealth of the Church.
So let us look at some of the other key figures of the English Reformation, and see whether they were of a different stripe.
It often surprises people that the first leader of the Church of England under Henry was not Archbishop Cranmer, but Thomas Cromwell - who was made the king’s Vicar-General, with direct authority over the Church and its Bishops. Cromwell was a Reformer, and pushed through the main religious changes of the 1530s - the royal supremacy, the printing of the English Bible, the closing of the monasteries, the destruction of shrines and images, and the restriction of Holy Days.
Cromwell’s methods however, were anything but holy. He was a genius of sorts, helping to construct a tightly-controlled police-state, the type of which any 20th Century dictator would have been proud. Cromwell erected a system built on fear, torture and death. Criticising the king, his divorce, or failing to agree that Henry was head of the church, now became high treason - to be punished by disembowelment whilst still alive, hanging and quartering. In the end, even failing to denounce anyone else who criticised these things became treason. Guilty verdicts were ensured by the introduction of the “Double Grand Jury” which made the jury trying a case liable to face trial themselves by a second jury if they came up with the wrong verdict. Acts of Attainder, allowing the execution of victims without any trial whatsoever, were also introduced. All these things were needed to enforce the Reformation in England.
Churches, shrines and abbeys were plundered for funds to build Henry’s palaces and fortiffications. priceless ancient books and works of art were torn apart for their value in gold and gems.
Victims excuted by Cromwell included Thomas More and Bishop Fisher, as well as countless lesser-ranked people such as the Carthusian Monks, Observant Friars and any who dared to protest at the break with Rome. All of these suffered hanging, disembowelment and quartering. Abbots who refused to surrender their monasteries also fell victim:

Letter of Richard Pollard to Thomas Cromwell, November 16, 1539
Pleaseth it your Lordship to be advertised that…[On November 15] the late abbot of Glastonbury went from Wells to Glastonbury, and there was drawn through the town upon a hurdle to the hill called the Torre, where he was put to execution; …Afore his execution [he] was examined upon divers articles and interrogatories to him ministered by me, but he could accuse no man of himself of any offence against the king’s highness, nor would he confess no more gold nor silver nor any other thing more than he did before your Lordship in the Tower…I suppose it will be near Christmas before I shall have surveyed the lands at Glastonbury, and take the audit there….

Cromwell personally gained many of the monastic lands including all the lands of Lewes Priory, and the Abbeys of Colchester, St Osith and Launde.
Jealousies led to him being accused of treason, and he was executed without trial under his own laws in 1540.

 

[Teflon93]

Okay, who’s getting worked up? Did I not say that I am considering converting? There are many things I love about the Catholic Chuch and I just want to understand more. MY reformers as you call them, have nothing to do with me personally, or what I belive to be right or wrong. 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. I’m not saying that Protestants were totally innocent in all of there actions. MY christ, I am sure wept at the carnage of the reformation. There is no excusing out-and-out murder, from ANYONE, Catholic and Protestant alike, lest we forget the rest of the persecuted, Jews, non-belivers,etc…who had NADA to do with us heretic Protestants! All I want to know is, Why will the Church aknowledge these past leaders as being good, or venerable, after they did such horrible things? It’s different for Protestants because we can only speak for ourselves, church history is just not taught to us, and there is no head of the a church to make statements on these issues on behalf of our churches. This is not meant to be an attack, just a genuine lack of understanding, and wanting to know. In my simple-country-girl heart, I know there is no justification for evil, ever.

It is wonderful that you’re researching this and considering conversion.

In considering past wrongs, I find it useful to reflect on King David. He committed adultery and murder, and yet God loved him and continued to do so. David was by any lights, including those of his own day, a great sinner, and yet God loved him.

We are all great sinners, committing great sins, not the least of which is the sin of pride, which encourages us to judge impious those men who sought to defend their faith centuries ago because their ways are not our ways.

Is there nothing in our society which our forebears would despise?

I can assure you that Christ weeps over the millions of babies slaughtered in utero because we moderns deem infanticide a right equal if not superior to freedom of speech, religion, and assembly.

We must be careful to avoid judging too harshly our ancestors lest we risk having them judge us. I’m not so sure that the scales of the 21st and 16th centuries would be imbalanced in our favor in God’s eyes.

 

[Story]

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…

Concering the comment on Lucifer, all he ever had to do was plant a seed of evil or sin in fertile soil to get man to rebel against God…

Some would equate that with a beginning. I don’t necessarily look at it like that. He planted a seed with the intention of making an ultimate harvest of rebellion. I do believe he suceeded.

But that does not mean that translates to you in the same way it translated to those that Lucifer planted the seed in. You were born into Protestantism, have lived a good life in Christ, and everyone here recognizes that.

This whole idea parellels itself with two unmarried people have sex and creating a baby. The origin lies in sin, but not the baby. The baby can survive its surrounding birth circumstances, and live in God without any penalty…

The same can be said for those born into Protestantism…

I understand the road you are on from a spousal point of view. I saw my husband come into the Church in 2005, after many of these debates and arguements. He carried resentment and anger over many things that he had been taught by his Baptist preachers and parents. He also wanted to “see” where the Church had apologized for certain things.

My arguement was that he wanted to see where the Church was ‘humbled’ by its past, because he had been taught we were full of Pride if we hadn’t. And we all know pride is sin.

The Pope (JPII) had apologized on behalf of the Church for many wrongs in our past, including this one, during the Jubilee Year 2000. I was amazed at how many people didn’t watch it because he was the pope of the Catholic Church and then insisted that he never said it.

But he did. We regret the stains our human ancestors put on our Church History. WE as the children, have to live with those decisions, both secular and Church.But I would like to see that the majority of our past is more in line with Christ than our darkest moments.

I hope you can come to understand that too.

Story

 

[Randy_Carson]

Okay, who’s getting worked up? Did I not say that I am considering converting? There are many things I love about the Catholic Chuch and I just want to understand more. MY reformers as you call them, have nothing to do with me personally, or what I belive to be right or wrong. 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. I’m not saying that Protestants were totally innocent in all of there actions. MY christ, I am sure wept at the carnage of the reformation. There is no excusing out-and-out murder, from ANYONE, Catholic and Protestant alike, lest we forget the rest of the persecuted, Jews, non-belivers,etc…who had NADA to do with us heretic Protestants! All I want to know is, Why will the Church aknowledge these past leaders as being good, or venerable, after they did such horrible things? It’s different for Protestants because we can only speak for ourselves, church history is just not taught to us, and there is no head of the a church to make statements on these issues on behalf of our churches. This is not meant to be an attack, just a genuine lack of understanding, and wanting to know. In my simple-country-girl heart, I know there is no justification for evil, ever.

Kedera-

Things were different to a degree back then. We’re not being fair to former generations by judging them according to our standards. OTOH, Christians from former times would probably be horrified to learn how many unborn babies we have killed. Which atrocity is the greater horror?

That said, it might be helpful if you could share with us a few of the titles you are reading so that we can evaluate the “slant” of those authors. History is rarely written by a thoroughly neutral party. In turn, we might be able to suggest some titles for you to consider.

However, I would also recommend reading the excellent articles available on this website that cover the Inquisition, the Crusades and this ridiculous “Hitler’s Pope” myth.

One of the Proverbs says something like, “The first to speak seems right until another gets up to question him.”

Perhaps it’s time to hear “the rest of the story.” :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Okay, who’s getting worked up? Did I not say that I am considering converting? There are many things I love about the Catholic Chuch and I just want to understand more. MY reformers as you call them, have nothing to do with me personally, or what I belive to be right or wrong. 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. I’m not saying that Protestants were totally innocent in all of there actions. MY christ, I am sure wept at the carnage of the reformation. There is no excusing out-and-out murder, from ANYONE, Catholic and Protestant alike, lest we forget the rest of the persecuted, Jews, non-belivers,etc…who had NADA to do with us heretic Protestants! All I want to know is, Why will the Church aknowledge these past leaders as being good, or venerable, after they did such horrible things? It’s different for Protestants because we can only speak for ourselves, church history is just not taught to us, and there is no head of the a church to make statements on these issues on behalf of our churches. This is not meant to be an attack, just a genuine lack of understanding, and wanting to know. In my simple-country-girl heart, I know there is no justification for evil, ever.

Kedera-

Things were different to a degree back then. We’re not being fair to former generations by judging them according to our standards. OTOH, Christians from former times would probably be horrified to learn how many unborn babies we have killed. Which atrocity is the greater horror?

That said, it might be helpful if you could share with us a few of the titles you are reading so that we can evaluate the “slant” of those authors. History is rarely written by a thoroughly neutral party. In turn, we might be able to suggest some titles for you to consider.

However, I would also recommend reading the excellent articles available on this website that cover the Inquisition, the Crusades and this ridiculous “Hitler’s Pope” myth.

One of the Proverbs says something like, “The first to speak seems right until another gets up to question him.”

Perhaps it’s time to hear “the rest of the story.” :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Okay, who’s getting worked up? Did I not say that I am considering converting? There are many things I love about the Catholic Chuch and I just want to understand more. MY reformers as you call them, have nothing to do with me personally, or what I belive to be right or wrong. 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. I’m not saying that Protestants were totally innocent in all of there actions. MY christ, I am sure wept at the carnage of the reformation. There is no excusing out-and-out murder, from ANYONE, Catholic and Protestant alike, lest we forget the rest of the persecuted, Jews, non-belivers,etc…who had NADA to do with us heretic Protestants! All I want to know is, Why will the Church aknowledge these past leaders as being good, or venerable, after they did such horrible things? It’s different for Protestants because we can only speak for ourselves, church history is just not taught to us, and there is no head of the a church to make statements on these issues on behalf of our churches. This is not meant to be an attack, just a genuine lack of understanding, and wanting to know. In my simple-country-girl heart, I know there is no justification for evil, ever.

Kedera-

Things were different to a degree back then. We’re not being fair to former generations by judging them according to our standards. OTOH, Christians from former times would probably be horrified to learn how many unborn babies we have killed. Which atrocity is the greater horror?

That said, it might be helpful if you could share with us a few of the titles you are reading so that we can evaluate the “slant” of those authors. History is rarely written by a thoroughly neutral party. In turn, we might be able to suggest some titles for you to consider.

However, I would also recommend reading the excellent articles available on this website that cover the Inquisition, the Crusades and this ridiculous “Hitler’s Pope” myth.

One of the Proverbs says something like, “The first to speak seems right until another gets up to question him.”

Perhaps it’s time to hear “the rest of the story.” :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Okay, who’s getting worked up? Did I not say that I am considering converting? There are many things I love about the Catholic Chuch and I just want to understand more. MY reformers as you call them, have nothing to do with me personally, or what I belive to be right or wrong. 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. I’m not saying that Protestants were totally innocent in all of there actions. MY christ, I am sure wept at the carnage of the reformation. There is no excusing out-and-out murder, from ANYONE, Catholic and Protestant alike, lest we forget the rest of the persecuted, Jews, non-belivers,etc…who had NADA to do with us heretic Protestants! All I want to know is, Why will the Church aknowledge these past leaders as being good, or venerable, after they did such horrible things? It’s different for Protestants because we can only speak for ourselves, church history is just not taught to us, and there is no head of the a church to make statements on these issues on behalf of our churches. This is not meant to be an attack, just a genuine lack of understanding, and wanting to know. In my simple-country-girl heart, I know there is no justification for evil, ever.

Kedera-

Things were different to a degree back then. We’re not being fair to former generations by judging them according to our standards. OTOH, Christians from former times would probably be horrified to learn how many unborn babies we have killed. Which atrocity is the greater horror?

That said, it might be helpful if you could share with us a few of the titles you are reading so that we can evaluate the “slant” of those authors. History is rarely written by a thoroughly neutral party. In turn, we might be able to suggest some titles for you to consider.

However, I would also recommend reading the excellent articles available on this website that cover the Inquisition, the Crusades and this ridiculous “Hitler’s Pope” myth.

One of the Proverbs says something like, “The first to speak seems right until another gets up to question him.”

Perhaps it’s time to hear “the rest of the story.” :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Okay, who’s getting worked up? Did I not say that I am considering converting? There are many things I love about the Catholic Chuch and I just want to understand more. MY reformers as you call them, have nothing to do with me personally, or what I belive to be right or wrong. 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. I’m not saying that Protestants were totally innocent in all of there actions. MY christ, I am sure wept at the carnage of the reformation. There is no excusing out-and-out murder, from ANYONE, Catholic and Protestant alike, lest we forget the rest of the persecuted, Jews, non-belivers,etc…who had NADA to do with us heretic Protestants! All I want to know is, Why will the Church aknowledge these past leaders as being good, or venerable, after they did such horrible things? It’s different for Protestants because we can only speak for ourselves, church history is just not taught to us, and there is no head of the a church to make statements on these issues on behalf of our churches. This is not meant to be an attack, just a genuine lack of understanding, and wanting to know. In my simple-country-girl heart, I know there is no justification for evil, ever.

Kedera-

Things were different to a degree back then. We’re not being fair to former generations by judging them according to our standards. OTOH, Christians from former times would probably be horrified to learn how many unborn babies we have killed. Which atrocity is the greater horror?

That said, it might be helpful if you could share with us a few of the titles you are reading so that we can evaluate the “slant” of those authors. History is rarely written by a thoroughly neutral party. In turn, we might be able to suggest some titles for you to consider.

However, I would also recommend reading the excellent articles available on this website that cover the Inquisition, the Crusades and this ridiculous “Hitler’s Pope” myth.

One of the Proverbs says something like, “The first to speak seems right until another gets up to question him.”

Perhaps it’s time to hear “the rest of the story.” :tiphat:

 

[Church_Militant]

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.Then you’re really gonna be upset when you discover just how badly you’ve been misled.

Someone Has Lied to You About Our Pope Pius XII

See if that helps. This is all just anti-Catholic propaganda.

I’m not saying that Protestants were totally innocent in all of there actions. MY christ, I am sure wept at the carnage of the reformation. There is no excusing out-and-out murder, from ANYONE, Catholic and Protestant alike, lest we forget the rest of the persecuted, Jews, non-belivers,etc…who had NADA to do with us heretic Protestants! All I want to know is, Why will the Church aknowledge these past leaders as being good, or venerable, after they did such horrible things?

Consider the esteem that Martin Luther is held in… I don’t sweat all that, but I do concern myself with the truth.

Understand one very important factor. Human beings are “flawed individuals” (to quote Jimmy Buffett) and even the most faithful believers are subject to fall if they or those they love are persecuted for any reason. Are we any different today? I don’t think so…look at all the hateful rhetoric spewing from both Muslims and Christians of all stripes today. Is that righteous? I don’t really think so, nor does it help to resolve the conflicts.

In the end, I believe that we all need to hear the voice of Our Lord ringing down the centuries to us when He said, "…“Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone…” (John 8:7)

It’s different for Protestants because we can only speak for ourselves, church history is just not taught to us, and there is no head of the a church to make statements on these issues on behalf of our churches.

Yep…and they tend to be conveniently forgotten…after all…who really wants to deal with this? Right? That’s just human

This is not meant to be an attack, just a genuine lack of understanding, and wanting to know. In my simple-country-girl heart, I know there is no justification for evil, ever.

Hey, I agree 100%, but just remember that the failings of individual believers does not indict the truths of the faith. It’s fairly simple to become a Christian. It’s a great deal more difficult to live like one isn’t it?
The peace of the Lord be always with you.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

… 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…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

From the Holy See:

The Use of Force in the Service of Truth

To the counter-witness of the division between Christians should be added that of the various occasions in the past millennium when doubtful means were employed in the pursuit of good ends, such as the proclamation of the Gospel or the defense of the unity of the faith. “Another sad chapter of history to which the sons and daughters of the Church must return with a spirit of repentance is that of the acquiescence given, especially in certain centuries, to intolerance and even the use of force in the service of truth.”(78) This refers to forms of evangelization that employed improper means to announce the revealed truth or did not include an evangelical discernment suited to the cultural values of peoples or did not respect the consciences of the persons to whom the faith was presented, as well as all forms of force used in the repression and correction of errors.

Analogous attention should be paid to all the failures, for which the sons and daughters of the Church may have been responsible, to denounce injustice and violence in the great variety of historical situations: “Then there is the lack of discernment by many Christians in situations where basic human rights were violated. The request for forgiveness applies to whatever should have been done or was passed over in silence because of weakness or bad judgement, to what was done or said hesitantly or inappropriately.”(79)

As always, establishing the historical truth by means of historical-critical research is decisive. Once the facts have been established, it will be necessary to evaluate their spiritual and moral value, as well as their objective significance. Only thus will it be possible to avoid every form of mythical memory and reach a fair critical memory capable - in the light of faith - of producing fruits of conversion and renewal. “From these painful moments of the past a lesson can be drawn for the future, leading all Christians to adhere fully to the sublime principle stated by the Council: ‘The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it wins over the mind with both gentleness and power.’”(80)

(78) Apostolic Letter Tertio millennio adveniente (TMA)**, 35.

(79) John Paul II, General Audience Discourse of September 1, 1999; in L’Osservatore Romano, Eng. ed., September 8, 1999, 7.

(80) *TMA, *35. The citation from the Second Vatican Council is from Dignitatis humanae, 1.
source]

 

[itsjustdave1988]

See more here:

Day of Pardon, 12 March 2000