Christian Forums and Message Board

Christian Interests => Organized Religion and Religious Movements Discussions => Catholic Forum => Topic started by: mistergus on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 15:42:00

Title: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 15:42:00
     I am posting below a tract by the late Batsell Barrett Baxter, “A Dangerous Doctrine
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 15:44:30
Following is Part 2 of "A Dangerous Doctrine", by Batsell Barrett Baxter...

                                    


                                         Both Church and State
                                                    (Part 2)

     The Roman Catholic Church is more than a church; it is a state.  It is a sovereign power, having legislative, executive, judicial powers, including the power of coercion.  The Catholic state has a full civil government with a flag, police force, courts and postage stamps.  Currencies, in the form of gold and silver coins, bearing the effigy of the Pope, are issued and some five hundred national citizens use Vatican passports when they wish to travel.  The Roman Catholic Church  - operating as a State  -  sends ambassadors to fifty-two different nations and invites ambassadors from other nations, including our own, to be sent to it.
     Ostheimer and Delaney, in their book, Christian Principles and National Problems, with the imprimatur of Cardinal Spellman, on page 898 put it this way: “The doctrine of the Church…is that the State must profess and promote not any religion, but the one true form of worship founded by Christ and continued today in the Catholic Church alone.  Such a public profession…will bring the State into some relation with Catholicism, the only complete expression of God’s revealed truth.  As an ideal, then, Church and State should be united in their efforts.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: don has a plan on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 16:20:59
I have no doubt that if any religious group (including fundamentalist Christians) had enough power in this country, we would not enjoy as much freedom as we do today.  No doubt whatsoever.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: spurly on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 16:30:53
    I am posting below a tract by the late Batsell Barrett Baxter, “A Dangerous Doctrine”.  It lays out in undeniable form that the religious freedom we enjoy in America will be lost if the Roman Catholic Church ever becomes a majority in this country.  Although we hear much regarding the threats to our way of life from Muslim extremists, the truth is, they are nowhere near the danger to us that the Roman Catholic Church is.

Mistergus, I understand why you think what you stated above is true, but what you think is absolutely wrong.  To even suggest that the Catholic Church is more dangerous than Muslim extremists is outrageous.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 17:48:03
    I am posting below a tract by the late Batsell Barrett Baxter, “A Dangerous Doctrine
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 17:52:50
I have no doubt that if any religious group (including fundamentalist Christians) had enough power in this country, we would not enjoy as much freedom as we do today.  No doubt whatsoever.

No doubt you are correct.  Human nature being what it is, this could come to pass.  But there's a difference.

This is what the Roman Catholic Church is planning.  It is their determined intention.  They have layed out this course of action ahead of time.

It's one thing to fall into evil.  But to plan it out, as official policy...I know no other major denomination that has done that.

And I doubt you do, either.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 18:11:20
Radical Islam has.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: VerbumReale on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 18:48:16
I have no doubt that if any religious group (including fundamentalist Christians) had enough power in this country, we would not enjoy as much freedom as we do today.  No doubt whatsoever.

No doubt you are correct.  Human nature being what it is, this could come to pass.  But there's a difference.

This is what the Roman Catholic Church is planning.  It is their determined intention.  They have layed out this course of action ahead of time.

It's one thing to fall into evil.  But to plan it out, as official policy...I know no other major denomination that has done that.

And I doubt you do, either.

Robert G

Seriously, the Catholics are a big threat.  I mean certainly we have all heard about how they have threatened the Republican party that if they didn't pick a candidate that the Catholics wanted then they would recruit their own third-party candidate.

Oh wait, that's right, it's not the Catholic church that did that is it?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Nevertheless on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 19:27:53
Quote
Many groups hold secret some of their more explosive tenants.  How many Mormons know their Church believes the Garden of Eden was in Joplin, MO?

 rofl

I've been to Joplin, and it ain't there!
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Mon Oct 15, 2007 - 19:37:59
The Garden of Eden was somewhere near the Texas/New Mexico border.  Every sign of it ever existing has been completely blotted out.  At least that's the only explanation I can come up with for that part of the country.... ::lookaround::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Wed Oct 24, 2007 - 12:50:20
It is true in the sense that the Roman Catholic Church is in a much better position to obtain control in this country than the Muslims likely ever will be.

The Catholic Church is not the bigger threat because of the violence they would inflict (no accusation of that), but because the possibly of their gaining control is much more plausible.

So yes, the Roman Catholic Church is a more real and present danger than Muslim extremists are.

Robert G

Oh my.  Only one legitimate response to this... rofl
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: OkiMar on Wed Oct 24, 2007 - 14:54:09
Of course some of the more prominant Catholics in Congress and the Senate are liberal democrats who are 180 degrees out from official Catholic teaching (i.e. abortion).
Title: reply
Post by: churchmember on Wed Oct 24, 2007 - 15:22:44
I've often wondered  ::pondering::  if Catholicism is what has been responsible for the cause of third world countries being the way they are.     
I wonder if Catholicism churns out blind followers over time so that there are large groups of peoples looking for any government in which to put their trust. 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: OkiMar on Wed Oct 24, 2007 - 15:30:55
Actually, some of the major contributors to the problems in the Middle East are the results of the 1919 Paris Peace Conference.  This absolutely ludicrous plan gave rise, in large measure, to Arab Nationalism which subsequently gave rise to Islamic Totalitarianism.  We can blame Wilson, George, and Clemenceau, mostly the latter two.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Wed Oct 24, 2007 - 17:25:21
I've often wondered  ::pondering::  if Catholicism is what has been responsible for the cause of third world countries being the way they are.    
I wonder if Catholicism churns out blind followers over time so that there are large groups of peoples looking for any government in which to put their trust. 

I don't know, but in those "Christian" countries where illiteracy is the highest (specifically, Central and South America), the Roman Catholic Church is by far the most dominate.  Accident?  I doubt it.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: NarrowWay on Wed Oct 24, 2007 - 18:43:30
I hate, hate Catholicism.  Then again, I hate more or less ALL organized religion.  But Catholicism is really an exception. 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 15:14:54
I hate, hate Catholicism.  Then again, I hate more or less ALL organized religion.  But Catholicism is really an exception. 

why would you hate what God called for us to do. Organized religion. Do not forsake the assembling of the brotheren.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 15:51:06
so now the catholics are the enemy and not satan? and if the catholics say the lutherins are the bad guys, then who is? this is all nonsense.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 15:52:46
For those who notice a missing phrase, consigning another believer to the pit of Hell in no uncertain terms is still against board rules.  Thank you. 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 16:16:25
I hate, hate Catholicism.  Then again, I hate more or less ALL organized religion.  But Catholicism is really an exception. 

Well, many people do hate that which they fear or do not understand.  As a Catholic, I can say with certainty that I do not hate my Protestant brethren.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 16:17:36
Of course some of the more prominant Catholics in Congress and the Senate are liberal democrats who are 180 degrees out from official Catholic teaching (i.e. abortion).

Excellent point.  Don't think that bodes well for the Church taking over the world...
Title: Re: reply
Post by: broach972 on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 16:20:20
I've often wondered  ::pondering::  if Catholicism is what has been responsible for the cause of third world countries being the way they are.     
I wonder if Catholicism churns out blind followers over time so that there are large groups of peoples looking for any government in which to put their trust. 

Oh my...you really do give the Church way more credit then it deserves.  I can say that Catholicism is not responsible for the problems plaguing the Third World.  I can assure you than I am not a blind follower.  I actually embraced Catholicism with wide open eyes.  Praise be to God.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 16:22:58
I've often wondered  ::pondering::  if Catholicism is what has been responsible for the cause of third world countries being the way they are.    
I wonder if Catholicism churns out blind followers over time so that there are large groups of peoples looking for any government in which to put their trust. 

I don't know, but in those "Christian" countries where illiteracy is the highest (specifically, Central and South America), the Roman Catholic Church is by far the most dominate.  Accident?  I doubt it.

Robert G

Mistergus, you must have way too much time on your hands.  You are blaming the Catholic Church for the region's illiteracy.  Give me a break.  I teach World Geography and I can assure you that is not the case.  Lack of funding and an inadequate education system is responsible for that.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 17:12:35
Lets say for the sake of arguement (which i would not side with) that the catholic church is the anti-Christ and inerrantly evil. So what, what business is that of yours/mine if that were the case? Who are you to judge another? Is that not Gods call any longer? All this is useless nonsense that does nothing to help God, it can only hurt us/and the lost souls out there! I call it a complete disgrace of Gods grace/love.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 18:27:26
Mistergus, you must have way too much time on your hands.  You are blaming the Catholic Church for the region's illiteracy.  Give me a break.  I teach World Geography and I can assure you that is not the case.  Lack of funding and an inadequate education system is responsible for that.

Actually, you've got it backwards.  I blame the regions illiteracy for the Catholic Church.  Being dominate, anyway.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 18:41:00
fwiw, years ago, Sting blamed the region's poverty on the Catholic Church's birth control policy and desire to retain power.

I tend to think he carried things a little too far.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Bon Voyage on Thu Oct 25, 2007 - 19:10:29
fwiw, years ago, Sting blamed the region's poverty on the Catholic Church's birth control policy and desire to retain power.

I tend to think he carried things a little too far.

Was that pre- or post- Crow Sting?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 21:03:42
fwiw, years ago, Sting blamed the region's poverty on the Catholic Church's birth control policy and desire to retain power.

I tend to think he carried things a little too far.

Was that pre- or post- Crow Sting?


I must really be out of touch; I have no idea what you're talking about. 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: yogi bear on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 21:07:47
I think he is asking is it a pretty crow or one on a fence post.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 21:09:59
Oh.  That makes sense.  Neither; it's a raven.  Keeps muttering about some idiot it ran into once who kept going on and on about someone named Lenore. Says it really got him going by just repeating the word "nevermore" over and over again, like it couldn't say anything else.

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Bon Voyage on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 21:14:11
fwiw, years ago, Sting blamed the region's poverty on the Catholic Church's birth control policy and desire to retain power.

I tend to think he carried things a little too far.


Was that pre- or post- Crow Sting?



I must really be out of touch; I have no idea what you're talking about. 


Post Crow Sting
(http://www.mikemooneyham.com/pages/binarydata/sting01.jpg)

Pre-Crow Sting
(http://www.digitpress.com/columns/images/kunkel_ces6.jpg)
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Johnb on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 21:14:31
Robert my brother.  I have not posted on this board in some time. However, you just seem tohave a way of pulling me from the light into the darkness.  The enemy is not the RCC.  In fact we owe them for many good things.  I love all who own Christ as their Lord and savior.  Radical Islam and lack of commitment to the cause of Christ are the veheciles I believe saton is using against the kingdom of Christ today.  Later Johnb
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 21:16:02
Oh.  I thought this had something to do with Cheryl.  I was thinking that I knew about Clapton and Armstrong, but Sting?  What would Trudy think?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Mere Nick on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 23:35:14
For those who notice a missing phrase, consigning another believer to the pit of Hell in no uncertain terms is still against board rules.  Thank you. 

The pit?  Is that anything like the gaping maw?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Mere Nick on Fri Oct 26, 2007 - 23:37:24
If there were any truth to the claim that Catholicism would mess with religious freedom, it needs to get busy in Europe before the dirty nightshirts take the place over.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 11:44:39
Robert my brother.  I have not posted on this board in some time. However, you just seem tohave a way of pulling me from the light into the darkness.  The enemy is not the RCC.  In fact we owe them for many good things.  I love all who own Christ as their Lord and savior.  Radical Islam and lack of commitment to the cause of Christ are the veheciles I believe saton is using against the kingdom of Christ today.  Later Johnb

You remind me of those in the 1930's who dismissed Hitler as a threat, convinced that his boasts and intentions (previously stated) was just talk, and nothing to worry about.  Appeasers always end up being wrong, don't they?

I know it's hard to think about the unpleasant things in life.  Better to just ignore them, and they will go away, right?  We have the president of Iran today stating his intention to destroy Israel as soon as he can.  Those ignoring him today are in the same camp as those who ignored Hitler.

History shows that people who ignore the stated threats to us are always the enemy and hinderance of freedom.  Those who recognize the gathering and present threats are the ones who we owe our freedoms to.  They are the heros.

The position of the Roman Catholic Church is clear.  They've told us what they intend to do.  They will strip you, Johnb, of your religious freedom at their first opportunity.  Do you not believe them?  Do you not care?  Do you want America to be as Mexico, where only the Roman Church has free reign?

"Am I your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"

Time to get your head out of the sand, Johnb.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: zoonance on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 12:48:08
I find some "Outstanding" publications reflect in print rather clearly, my experience of suppressed religious freedom
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 14:02:57
Up until now, I have decided not to respond to this thread, however I can no longer ignore my two favorite topics - Catholic bashing and conspiracy theories.

There are two issues here, temporal and spiritual leadership.  Political power has the power to corrupt good people, unlimited political power corrupts all people.  Spiritual leadership has the power to corrupt good people as well, but if you mix temporal leadership and spiritual leadership together, you are certain to create tyranny.

Yes, the Catholic Church played dual roles in the Middle Ages, both in spiritual and temporal leadership.  The Reformation and the plague helped to put the Catholic Church back into a proper role: concerning itself with people's spiritually, rather than striving for temporal leadership.  Unfortunately, despite the Reformer's best intentions, their actions did not stop unscrupulous people from using religion as a means to gain temporal power; in fact, it only created a void and proceeding power grab between various Reformers and Popes.

If the Reformers were really concerned with reforming Christianity during the end of the Middle Ages they would have realized that absolute power really does corrupt ALL people (not just Catholic leadership), and would have worked toward separation of Church and state, rather than replacing the current power structure (the Vatican) with their own (Anglican, Calvin, Zwingli) forms of government, which they believed to be righteous.  Of course it is easy to see this in hindsight, especially since we can now see how well separation of church and state inoculates against religious power grabs.

Although the Catholic Church is not shy about exerting spiritual influence among todays world leaders, just like Pat Robertson, the former Jerry Falwell and a whole slew of Evangelical leaders; the Vatican is not concerned with, nor would it be possible for it to gain the political power it once held - as long as we are diligent about protecting the idea of separation of church and state.  Also, we need to be just as guarded against people who attempt to use any church leadership role to gain temporal power, not just people who use Catholicism.

So it appears to me that we all need to work to keep religion dogma (not influence) out of politics - separation of church and state protects religion and protects us from people who like to use religion to gain and justify their own power.  I sort of like Turkey's model of government; Turkey has a constitutional law that guarantees a secular government and religious freedom as protection against radical Muslim leadership taking over the government.  The army is in place to overthrow any leader that shows signs of enacting religious dogma into law.

Finally, this thread is a bit ridiculous because it is conspiracy minded and presupposes that the Catholic Church is the only religious power structure that has ever used religion to exert temporal power in a corrupt manner. 

blessings
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 15:48:01
As has been noted elsewhere on this board, a comparison to Hitler tends to be a strong sign that one should stop taking the argument seriously.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 19:23:08
Finally, this thread is a bit ridiculous because it is conspiracy minded and presupposes that the Catholic Church is the only religious power structure that has ever used religion to exert temporal power in a corrupt manner.

Do you know of another denomination among "Christiandom" which has pledged and committed itself to denying the religious freedoms of other believers?  In advance?

If you do, then tell us who it is.  If you don't, then stop attacking the warning you're being given.

Anyone?

The spirit of Neville Chamberlain lives on this board, doesn't it?  Thank God for those who recognize the Roman Catholic Church for the unGodly threat that it is.

They only are the ones who protect religious freedom.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Johnb on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 20:30:08
Robert seems we always have a difficult time communicating.  Because I love Catholics and all who own Christ as their savior and understand their contribution to preserving the word does not mean I trust their or any other organized religious hierarchy.  No one can take my religious freedom because it does not come from man.  They may take my life but not the freedom I have in Christ.  The greatest threat to Christianity is from within not from outside forces.  Lack of commitment to the simple gospel is our greatest enemy.  That is where saton wins.  I don't  pratice appeasment I just save my combat for the real enemy and try not to waste my time attacking windmills on a donkey.   At least your are not complacent. Later johnb


" The harder you have to look for something good to say about a person; the more desperately they need to hear it. "   
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 20:33:31
Finally, this thread is a bit ridiculous because it is conspiracy minded and presupposes that the Catholic Church is the only religious power structure that has ever used religion to exert temporal power in a corrupt manner.

Do you know of another denomination among "Christiandom" which has pledged and committed itself to denying the religious freedoms of other believers?  In advance?

If you do, then tell us who it is.  If you don't, then stop attacking the warning you're being given.

Anyone?

The spirit of Neville Chamberlain lives on this board, doesn't it?  Thank God for those who recognize the Roman Catholic Church for the unGodly threat that it is.

They only are the ones who protect religious freedom.

Robert G

Puritan New England, Quaker Pennsylvania, Amish Pennsylvania, Anglican England, Calvinist France, Presbyterian Scotland, Conservative Protestant South (the Bible Belt) were or are all intolerant of religious freedom.

You're kidding right?  How about the Religious Right, in America, for one?  Exerting their belief that nonChristian ideals and practices should be criminalized - homosexuality, plural marriage, abortion, euthanasia, etc; while advocating the legalization of Christian ideals and practices like displaying the Ten Commandments in government facilities, administrative lead prayer in schools, teaching the philosophy of Intelligent Design in science classes, presenting only the Christianized viewpoint of History in classrooms, teaching abstainance only in schools, pro-Israel politics, etc.

And please, don't try and tell me that a Conservative Protestant Christian leaders in this country would not forbid Catholicism, Islam and Eastern religions if they could get away with it.

Puritan New England outlawed Shakers, Quakers, Catholics and Anabaptists for well over a century in this country.  Catholicism and Judaism are still censored in parts of the South, even today. 

The answer is to protect the ideal and practice of the separation of church and state, not to accuse other groups of being tyrants, when our own group either has a track record of the same crimes or would commit them if they had half a chance.

blessings

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 20:39:44
BTW, I have noticed with relief that most of the people who have responded to this post are level-headed, evenhanded Christians that may not believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church, but recognize the difference between blaming one church for bad behavior and recognizing a flaw in human nature.

blessings
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 20:43:28
Ravenlorre,

Please name one example of a "Christian" denomination that has enshrined in their official body of doctrine their official intention to deny freedom of religion to other believers.

You don't want to recognize what's in front of you, do you?

Acccidental sin is one thing.  To plan it in advance...that's something entirely far worse.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Sat Oct 27, 2007 - 20:50:09
The Puritans.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 00:01:23
Ravenlorre,

Please name one example of a "Christian" denomination that has enshrined in their official body of doctrine their official intention to deny freedom of religion to other believers.

You don't want to recognize what's in front of you, do you?

Acccidental sin is one thing.  To plan it in advance...that's something entirely far worse.

Robert G


Before the separation of Church and State, the law of the land was the law of the Church or denomination in control of the country at the time.

1.  Zwingli:  Under the Reformation, Zürich became a theocracy ruled by Zwingli and a Christian magistrate. Sweeping reforms were instituted, among them the conversion of monasteries into hospitals, the removal of religious images, and the elimination of Mass and confession. Eventually Zwingli taught that devout Christians have need of neither pope nor church.

During 1525 a radical Protestant group called the Anabaptists challenged Zwingli's rule. In a disputation, however, held before the council on the following January 2, Zwingli defeated the Anabaptists, whose leaders were then banished from Zürich.

2.  King Henry VIII rule of England as the head of the Anglican Church:  The Act of Supremacy of 1534 declared the English crown to be 'the only supreme head on earth of the Church in England' in place of the Pope.  Opposition to Henry's religious policies was quickly suppressed in England. A number of dissenting monks were tortured and executed. The most prominent resisters included John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, and Sir Thomas More, Henry's former Lord Chancellor, both of whom refused to take the oath and were subsequently convicted of high treason and beheaded at Tyburn in 1535. Thomas Cromwell, for whom was created the post of "Vicegerent in Spirituals", was authorized to visit monasteries, ostensibly to ensure that they followed royal instructions, but in reality to assess their wealth. Cromwell's commissioners for the suppression of religious houses included Lavton, Pollard and Moyle. The death of Abbot Richard Whyting is just one example of the bloodshed during the suppression. In 1536, an Act of Parliament allowed Henry to seize the possessions of the lesser monasteries (those with annual incomes of £200 or less). These suppressions in turn contributed to further resistance among the English people, most notably in the Pilgrimage of Grace, a large uprising in northern England in October of the same year. Henry VIII promised the rebels he would pardon them and thanked them for raising the issues to his attention, then invited the rebel leader, Robert Aske to have a royal banquet with him. At the banquet, Henry tactfully asked Aske to write down what had happened so he could have a better idea of the problems he would 'change'. Aske did what the King asked, though he had actually just written what would later be used against him as a confession. The King's word could not be questioned (as he was held as God's chosen, and second only to God himself) so Aske told the rebels they had been successful and they could disperse and go home. However, because Henry saw the rebels as traitors, he did not feel obliged to keep his promises. The rebels realized that the King was not keeping his promises and rebelled again later that year, but their strength was not as great and the King ordered the rebellions crushed. The leaders, including Aske, were arrested and executed for treason. Dissolution of the remaining, larger monasteries followed a subsequent authorizing act by Parliament in April 1539.

3.  John Calvin:  But within Geneva itself a struggle took place between those who wanted mild reform (such as no compulsory church attendance) and those who demanded radical reform such as Calvin and Farel. The split was deeper than this however. The mild reformers were called the Libertines and they wanted magistrates firmly in control of the clergy. Calvin wanted a city controlled by the clergy - a theocracy. In 1538, the Libertines won the day and Farel and Calvin fled the city and went to Strasbourg.

Puritan New England:  Puritan oppression, including torture and imprisonment of many leaders of non-Puritan Christian sects, led to the (voluntary or involuntary) "banishment" of many Christian leaders and their followers from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This negative impact of Puritanism on many new colonists had a positive result on American history in that it led to the founding of many new colonies—Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, New Hampshire, and others—as religious havens that were created for devout Christians who wanted to live outside the oppressive reach of Puritan theocracy.

5.  John Knox and Scotland Presbyterianism: That remained the picture until the Scottish Reformation in the early sixteen century, when the Church in Scotland broke with the papacy, and adopted a Calvinist confession. At that point the celebration of the Roman Mass was outlawed.  The revolution resulted in a powerful hatred of the Roman Church. Over the course of later medieval and early modern history violence against Catholics has broken out, often resulting in deaths, such as the torture of Saint John Ogilvie and execution of a Jesuit priest.

I could go on and on, but I think I have made my point - people of all denominations and religions are susceptible to persecuting people of other denominations or religions - it is not the religion, it is the people.

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism if you are interested in reading a short history of Anti-Catholicism.

Also, I found this statement, which I agree with completely:

Modern Anti-Catholic polemics

As well as standard Protestant polemics which likened Catholicism to the Anti-Christ and the Whore of Babylon other themes of modern anti-Catholic controversialists included accusations of paganism, idolatry and conspiracy theories which accuse the church of seeking world domination

After researching this Baxter fellow, he appears to be a decent sort of guy; well educated, yet entrenched in Church of Christ doctrine.  It beats me why he decided to assemble a document full of primarily out of context quotes from Catholic theologians that are not involved in creating official doctrine; I guess Baxter has bought in to the Anti-Catholicism prevalent in his community.

blessings
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 05:59:23
After researching this Baxter fellow, he appears to be a decent sort of guy; well educated, yet entrenched in Church of Christ doctrine.  It beats me why he decided to assemble a document full of primarily out of context quotes from Catholic theologians that are not involved in creating official doctrine;

From the Baxter tract...



                                    Syllabus of Errors

     Pope Pius IX, in 1864, published a famous document entitled, Syllabus of Errors.  This document has been and still is a fundamental part of Roman doctrine and policy.  It contains these shocking declarations of policy:
“The State has not the right to leave every man free to profess and embrace whatever religion he shall deem true.
“It (the State) has not the right to exclude the pontiff or clergy from all dominion over temporal affairs.
“It (the State) has not the right to the entire direction of public schools.
“It (the State) has not the right to separate itself from the Church.
“It (the State) has not the right to uphold any marriage solemnized   otherwise than according to the form prescribed by the Council of Trent, even if solemnized according to a form sanctioned by civil law.

     After stating what the State may not do, then Pope Pius IX went on to state positively what the church could do.
“She (the Catholic Church) has the right to exercise her power without the permission or consent of the State.
“She has the right to employ force.
“She has the right to claim dominion in temporal things for the clergy and the Pope.
“She has the right to deprive the civil authority of the entire government of public schools.
“She has the right of annulling marriages solemnized only by civil contract.
“She has the right to require that the Catholic religion shall be the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all others.
“She has the right to require the State not to permit free expression of opinion.




Did you catch that part about employing force? 

Did you get that this is from a Pope, and still part of official Catholic Doctrine?

It amazes me that some will try to claim the sky is green, no matter what the facts are.  And they'll say it with a straight face!

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 12:39:30
Quote
Did you catch that part about employing force? 

Did you get that this is from a Pope, and still part of official Catholic Doctrine?

It amazes me that some will try to claim the sky is green, no matter what the facts are.  And they'll say it with a straight face!

Robert G

After spending years debating James White, I have noticed common tactics employed by people who value winning at any cost rather than seeking a mutual understanding or even reaching a mutual disagreement.  Ann Coulter is a good example of a political satirist who engages in this sort of rhetoric.  Let's take a closer look, shall we?

1.  Make an outrageous claim. It doesn't matter whether the Pope is speaking infallibly or not, or if you use a comment out of context, or even if the group you belong to is as guilty as the group you are making accusations against, because the goal is not to be fair-minded, even-handed or even accurate; all you need to do is elicit an emotional response from your opponent rather than a logical one.  Remember, you are always right and your opponent is always wrong; your job is to supply enough emotional rope for your opponent to hang himself.

2.  Rely on Mocking or Humor to ignite passion:  If you are of a conservative ilk, rely on a mocking, morally superior tone to deliver your message (James White, Ann Coulter, etc); if you happen to be liberal, use a lot of sarcastic humor to exalt yourself above your opponent's attempts to present himself/herself as morally superior (John Stewart, Steven Colbert, Al Franken).  BTW, liberals get the most points when they present themselves so convincingly that even conservatives mistake them as conservative! (Steven Colbert, Archie Bunker)

3.  Do not give an inch:  If your opponent happens to stumble upon a true statement, ignore, deny or re-frame the conversation!  In all cases, do not concede even a minor point to your opponent.

4.  Make your opponent work harder:  Always remember that you are right, regardless of the facts presented, and you will eventually prove it by weathering any storm created by your opponent.  Most importantly, make sure he spends most of his time researching the topic; make him feel like he has to prove you wrong.  If he presents troubling information about your own position simply refuse to acknowledge it.  The fact is, you set the pace and the agenda of the debate; after all, your opponent is merely a brainwashed innocent, or at worst, a conniving, interloper, who has no right to challenge your superior position, and only appears to have the nerve to do so without merit.  Furthermore, he is challenging you intentionally; therefore it is your Christian duty to put him in his place.

5.  Do not waste time reading posts or listening to responses from your opponent:  After all, reading your opponent's posts may ignite emotions within yourself, or take your mind off your primary goal: winning.  Instead of reading, skim your opponent's post for statements that can be quickly molded to aid you in your goal.  The best statements are usually the most irrelevant to your opponent's point - why re-post something meaningful or relevant?  Oh, and make sure you continuely apply the steady drumbeat of either a tone of mocking / moral superiority, or sarcastic humor.

6.  Stay the Course!:  Eventually your opponent with either hang himself or simply tire of the interaction; in both cases, you must declare victory.  Like any good staring contest or series of tic-tac-toe draws, it is not the person that presents the best case who wins, but the person who is left standing.

My point in this conversation is that we need to protect the ideal of the separation of Church and State because unscrupulous people use religion to gain and secure power.  Rather than denying that the Catholic Church has abused it's position in the past, I have simple widened that lens to include all religions / Christian churches and I have included examples to support my claims.  I believe that human nature leads to abuses of power rather than institutions. 

I have noticed that Robert is not concerned with acknowledging my, somewhat benign statement, despite the evidence presented.  This leads me to believe that he would rather remain married to the antiquated belief of a man who has apparently bought into a tired version of anti-catholic rhetoric; instead of trying to gather as many facts and perspectives about the situation in order to cultivate an educated point of view.

Is Baxter, a committed member of the Church of Christ the final word on Catholic doctrine and political policy?  Should we all trust a man who obviously disagrees with Catholicism to be unbiased in his assessment and compilation of quotes by a 19th century Pope?  It seems to me that people who are more interested in gathering facts rather than wallowing in the muck and the mire of conspiracy theories and anti-Catholic rhetoric, would seek out multiple sources to develop an educated opinion.

So Robert, are you intellectually curious enough to look beyond the salacious?  Do you have the character necessary to be intellectually honest or are you going to stay the course?

blessings

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 13:51:36
So Robert, are you intellectually curious enough to look beyond the salacious?  Do you have the character necessary to be intellectual honest or are you going to stay the course?

Intellectually curious?  Character?

Oh, man...

The official position of the Roman Catholic Church is to deny religious freedoms to non-Catholics once they become the majority in a country.  This is the facts.

You would rather blow smoke and throw red herrings (Ann Coulter) than deal with that.

Well, I am now doubting that you have the intellectual honesty to handle this topic.

Good day to you.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 13:51:50
Quote
I have noticed common tactics employed by people who want to win at any cost rather than seek a mutual understanding of the facts or even work toward a mutual disagreement.

1.  Make an outrageous claim. It doesn't matter if the Pope is or is not speaking infallibly, or if you take a comment out of context, or if the group you belong to is just as guilty as the group you are making accusations against, because the goal is not to be fair minded or even handed or even accurate; all you need to be concerned with is igniting an emotional response from your opponent rather than a logical one.  Remember, you are always right and your opponent is always wrong; your job is to supply the emotional rope necessary for your opponent to hang himself.

2.  Rely on Mocking or Humor to ignite passion:  If you are of a conservative ilk, rely on a mocking, morally superior tone to deliver your message (James White, Ann Coulter, etc); if you happen to be liberal use a lot of sarcastic humor to exalt yourself above your opponent's attempts at presenting himself/herself as morally superior (John Stewart, Steven Colbert, Al Franken).  BTW, liberals get the most points when they present themselves so convincingly that even conservatives mistake them for a conservative! (Archie Bunker)

3.  Do not give an inch:  If your opponent happens to stumble upon a true statement, ignore, deny or re-frame the conversation!  In all cases, never concede even the most minor point to your opponent.

4.  Make your opponent work harder:  Always remember that you are right, regardless of the facts presented, and you will eventually prove it by weathering any storm that may be created due to the information your opponent happens to give you.  Most importantly, make sure he spends most of his time researching the topic; you must put him in a place where he feels like he has prove you wrong.  If he presents troubling information to you about your own position simply refuse to acknowledge it.  The fact is you set the pace and the agenda of the debate; your opponent is either a brainwashed innocent or at worst, a conniving, interloper who has no right to challenge your superior position, and only appears to have the nerve to do so without merit.  Most importantly, he is challenging you intentionally; therefore it is the "Christian" thing to do to put him back in his place.

5.  Do not bother reading posts or listening to responses from your opponent:  After all, reading your opponent's posts may ignite emotions within yourself, or take your mind off your primary goal, winning.  Instead of reading, skim your opponent's post for statements that can be molded to aid in your ultimate goal.  The best statements are usually the most irrelevant to your opponent's point - why re-post something meaningful or relevant?  Oh, and make sure you continue to apply the steady drumbeat of either mocking / moral superiority, or sarcastic humor.

6.  Stay the Course!:  Eventually your opponent with either hang himself or simply tire of the interaction; in both cases, you must declare victory immediately.  Like any good staring contest or series of tic-tac-toe draws, it is not the person that presents the best case who wins, but the person who is left standing.
I'm gonna frame that and hang it on the wall behind my computer.   rofl
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 14:52:16
So Robert, are you intellectually curious enough to look beyond the salacious?  Do you have the character necessary to be intellectual honest or are you going to stay the course?

Intellectually curious?  Character?

Oh, man...

The official position of the Roman Catholic Church is to deny religious freedoms to non-Catholics once they become the majority in a country.  This is the facts.

You would rather blow smoke and throw red herrings (Ann Coulter) than deal with that.

Well, I am now doubting that you have the intellectual honesty to handle this topic.

Good day to you.

Robert G

I see you have chosen to employ #6 and stay the course.

Too bad,

blessings
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mllevaleur on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 18:24:01
You're kidding right?  How about the Religious Right, in America, for one?  Exerting their belief that nonChristian ideals and practices should be criminalized - homosexuality, plural marriage, abortion, euthanasia, etc; while advocating the legalization of Christian ideals and practices like displaying the Ten Commandments in government facilities, administrative lead prayer in schools, teaching the philosophy of Intelligent Design in science classes, presenting only the Christianized viewpoint of History in classrooms, teaching abstainance only in schools, pro-Israel politics, etc.

Whoa, now...totally different direction than the purpose of this thread (which I pretty much chose to ignore), but while I agree that some of these are examples of trying to use the government to force Christian beliefs on others, some of them I think are simply protecting life, period, regardless of religious beliefs. I mean...how far do we take it? I think murder is wrong, but what if someone else doesn't? Should I not have laws in place to criminalize murder just because "thou shalt not kill" happens to be part of my religious belief? I just don't think you can lump all of those into the same category of whacko religious right, personally.

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 19:26:52
So Robert, are you intellectually curious enough to look beyond the salacious?  Do you have the character necessary to be intellectual honest or are you going to stay the course?

Intellectually curious?  Character?

Oh, man...

The official position of the Roman Catholic Church is to deny religious freedoms to non-Catholics once they become the majority in a country.  This is the facts.

You would rather blow smoke and throw red herrings (Ann Coulter) than deal with that.

Well, I am now doubting that you have the intellectual honesty to handle this topic.

Good day to you.

Robert G

I see you have chosen to employ #6 and stay the course.

Too bad,

blessings

I prefer #2.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Sun Oct 28, 2007 - 19:37:42
Quote
Whoa, now...totally different direction than the purpose of this thread (which I pretty much chose to ignore), but while I agree that some of these are examples of trying to use the government to force Christian beliefs on others, some of them I think are simply protecting life, period, regardless of religious beliefs. I mean...how far do we take it? I think murder is wrong, but what if someone else doesn't? Should I not have laws in place to criminalize murder just because "thou shalt not kill" happens to be part of my religious belief? I just don't think you can lump all of those into the same category of whacko religious right, personally.



Hi Stephanie,

I have no doubt that you support life issues apart from religious reasons (I share this belief), but many in the Religious Right also support these issues and they would impose a Theocracy if they could gain enough power in this country.  Remember, I am not opposed to religious influence in America, I am opposed to one religious group taking control and imposing a Theocracy; therefore limiting religious freedom.  Once again I believe in the separation of Church and State as a means of protecting religious freedom.

blessings
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 08:10:13
Robert my brother.  I have not posted on this board in some time. However, you just seem tohave a way of pulling me from the light into the darkness.  The enemy is not the RCC.  In fact we owe them for many good things.  I love all who own Christ as their Lord and savior.  Radical Islam and lack of commitment to the cause of Christ are the veheciles I believe saton is using against the kingdom of Christ today.  Later Johnb

You remind me of those in the 1930's who dismissed Hitler as a threat, convinced that his boasts and intentions (previously stated) was just talk, and nothing to worry about.  Appeasers always end up being wrong, don't they?

I know it's hard to think about the unpleasant things in life.  Better to just ignore them, and they will go away, right?  We have the president of Iran today stating his intention to destroy Israel as soon as he can.  Those ignoring him today are in the same camp as those who ignored Hitler.

History shows that people who ignore the stated threats to us are always the enemy and hinderance of freedom.  Those who recognize the gathering and present threats are the ones who we owe our freedoms to.  They are the heros.

The position of the Roman Catholic Church is clear.  They've told us what they intend to do.  They will strip you, Johnb, of your religious freedom at their first opportunity.  Do you not believe them?  Do you not care?  Do you want America to be as Mexico, where only the Roman Church has free reign?

"Am I your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"

Time to get your head out of the sand, Johnb.

Robert G

first of all it is not the truth, and it is not the Catholics church, it is the Church of our Lord, Jesus Christ, or do you not believe that? The gates of hell will not provail against it, and for your statement to be true, it would have to be hell working thru the Catholic church, so see, we have nothing to fear but fear itself, your whole idea of Catholic world dominance is ridiculas. No man can take away my freedom in Christ. The only thing that can is fear, so are you free in Christ or a slave to fear? You should be careful about comparing the church to hitler, God may not appreciate that.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mllevaleur on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 08:13:01
Quote
Whoa, now...totally different direction than the purpose of this thread (which I pretty much chose to ignore), but while I agree that some of these are examples of trying to use the government to force Christian beliefs on others, some of them I think are simply protecting life, period, regardless of religious beliefs. I mean...how far do we take it? I think murder is wrong, but what if someone else doesn't? Should I not have laws in place to criminalize murder just because "thou shalt not kill" happens to be part of my religious belief? I just don't think you can lump all of those into the same category of whacko religious right, personally.



Hi Stephanie,

I have no doubt that you support life issues apart from religious reasons (I share this belief), but many in the Religious Right also support these issues and they would impose a Theocracy if they could gain enough power in this country.  Remember, I am not opposed to religious influence in America, I am opposed to one religious group taking control and imposing a Theocracy; therefore limiting religious freedom.  Once again I believe in the separation of Church and State as a means of protecting religious freedom.

blessings

Ok gotcha!  ::tippinghat::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 08:24:54
So Robert, are you intellectually curious enough to look beyond the salacious?  Do you have the character necessary to be intellectual honest or are you going to stay the course?

Intellectually curious?  Character?

Oh, man...

The official position of the Roman Catholic Church is to deny religious freedoms to non-Catholics once they become the majority in a country.  This is the facts.

You would rather blow smoke and throw red herrings (Ann Coulter) than deal with that.

Well, I am now doubting that you have the intellectual honesty to handle this topic.

Good day to you.

Robert G

the Catholic church is not the power of the church, have we all forgotten who has defeated the enemy and who the enemy is? who is it sitting at the right hand of God?

IF, the church in America looses its freedom it will not be because of the Catholic church, but rather because God allowed us to have our religious freedom takin away, and why? Because we are either asleep (cold) or lukewarm. And if God chooses to use the Catholic church to do so, then that would be His choose. But this is all hinged on 'IF" God chooses to do so, and 'IF' He uses that vichicle to do so, but He could use birds or even stones to do so, if He wanted. But the bottom line, no one can take our freedom unless God allows it to happen.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 08:30:29
In various times and places, the Catholic church has repressed and oppressed a lot of people and a lot of freedoms.  So?  They've also built a lot of hospitals and fed a lot of orphans.  So?

Why is a thread like this even going on so long?  It's like starting a thread with an OP like "The sky is blue.  Sometimes it has rained, though."  The only real reply is "And your point is?"
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 12:02:24
Considering that many non-Catholic denominations are living in glass houses, they need to put those stones back where they got them.  To accuse the Catholic Church of wanting to politically control this country is quite hypocritical and quite absurd.  Ravenlorre makes some excellent points throughout history where non-Catholics and non-Catholic groups have instituted theocracies that have smashed personal liberties and freedoms.

I can assure you that George Bush is not a Catholic and look what he has done at slowly chipping away at our personal freedom.  The Religious Right, most Evangelical Protestants, in this country are doing everything to control what you watch on TV, see at the movies, and even what books you read.  Mistergus, you have committed the cardinal sin in historical studies.  You have pulled a document from a different time and presented it in hopes of many here will judge it by our own values and standards.  You simply cannot do this and make a valid argument.  Besides, you never mention why this document was even issued.  What were the circumstances behind it, etc.

Mistergus, if you want to bash Catholicism, then by all means make every attempt.  But stick to current doctrine and teachings of the Church.  Don't pull out some obscure document that has nothing to do with official doctrines or teachings of the Church.  Should I believe that every current Southern Baptist believes in and supports the institution of slavery simply because it was created for that very purpose?  I think you get the picture.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 12:04:40

After spending years debating James White, I have noticed common tactics employed by people who value winning at any cost rather than seeking a mutual understanding or even reaching a mutual disagreement.  Ann Coulter is a good example of a political satirist who engages in this sort of rhetoric.  Let's take a closer look, shall we?

1.  Make an outrageous claim. It doesn't matter whether the Pope is speaking infallibly or not, or if you use a comment out of context, or even if the group you belong to is as guilty as the group you are making accusations against, because the goal is not to be fair-minded, even-handed or even accurate; all you need to do is elicit an emotional response from your opponent rather than a logical one.  Remember, you are always right and your opponent is always wrong; your job is to supply enough emotional rope for your opponent to hang himself.

2.  Rely on Mocking or Humor to ignite passion:  If you are of a conservative ilk, rely on a mocking, morally superior tone to deliver your message (James White, Ann Coulter, etc); if you happen to be liberal, use a lot of sarcastic humor to exalt yourself above your opponent's attempts to present himself/herself as morally superior (John Stewart, Steven Colbert, Al Franken).  BTW, liberals get the most points when they present themselves so convincingly that even conservatives mistake them as conservative! (Steven Colbert, Archie Bunker)

3.  Do not give an inch:  If your opponent happens to stumble upon a true statement, ignore, deny or re-frame the conversation!  In all cases, do not concede even a minor point to your opponent.

4.  Make your opponent work harder:  Always remember that you are right, regardless of the facts presented, and you will eventually prove it by weathering any storm created by your opponent.  Most importantly, make sure he spends most of his time researching the topic; make him feel like he has to prove you wrong.  If he presents troubling information about your own position simply refuse to acknowledge it.  The fact is, you set the pace and the agenda of the debate; after all, your opponent is merely a brainwashed innocent, or at worst, a conniving, interloper, who has no right to challenge your superior position, and only appears to have the nerve to do so without merit.  Furthermore, he is challenging you intentionally; therefore it is your Christian duty to put him in his place.

5.  Do not waste time reading posts or listening to responses from your opponent:  After all, reading your opponent's posts may ignite emotions within yourself, or take your mind off your primary goal: winning.  Instead of reading, skim your opponent's post for statements that can be quickly molded to aid you in your goal.  The best statements are usually the most irrelevant to your opponent's point - why re-post something meaningful or relevant?  Oh, and make sure you continuely apply the steady drumbeat of either a tone of mocking / moral superiority, or sarcastic humor.

6.  Stay the Course!:  Eventually your opponent with either hang himself or simply tire of the interaction; in both cases, you must declare victory.  Like any good staring contest or series of tic-tac-toe draws, it is not the person that presents the best case who wins, but the person who is left standing.

My point in this conversation is that we need to protect the ideal of the separation of Church and State because unscrupulous people use religion to gain and secure power.  Rather than denying that the Catholic Church has abused it's position in the past, I have simple widened that lens to include all religions / Christian churches and I have included examples to support my claims.  I believe that human nature leads to abuses of power rather than institutions. 

I have noticed that Robert is not concerned with acknowledging my, somewhat benign statement, despite the evidence presented.  This leads me to believe that he would rather remain married to the antiquated belief of a man who has apparently bought into a tired version of anti-catholic rhetoric; instead of trying to gather as many facts and perspectives about the situation in order to cultivate an educated point of view.

Is Baxter, a committed member of the Church of Christ the final word on Catholic doctrine and political policy?  Should we all trust a man who obviously disagrees with Catholicism to be unbiased in his assessment and compilation of quotes by a 19th century Pope?  It seems to me that people who are more interested in gathering facts rather than wallowing in the muck and the mire of conspiracy theories and anti-Catholic rhetoric, would seek out multiple sources to develop an educated opinion.

So Robert, are you intellectually curious enough to look beyond the salacious?  Do you have the character necessary to be intellectually honest or are you going to stay the course?

blessings



Ravenlorre, this is absolutey priceless.  You absolutely rock!!  I have read debates between James White and Dave Armstrong and this is so true.  Even in my own personal discussion and debates with non-Catholics over doctrines and teachings of the Church, I have run into these tactics on many occassions.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 12:06:30
Before the separation of Church and State, the law of the land was the law of the Church or denomination in control of the country at the time.

1.  Zwingli:  Under the Reformation, Zürich became a theocracy ruled by Zwingli and a Christian magistrate. Sweeping reforms were instituted, among them the conversion of monasteries into hospitals, the removal of religious images, and the elimination of Mass and confession. Eventually Zwingli taught that devout Christians have need of neither pope nor church.

During 1525 a radical Protestant group called the Anabaptists challenged Zwingli's rule. In a disputation, however, held before the council on the following January 2, Zwingli defeated the Anabaptists, whose leaders were then banished from Zürich.

2.  King Henry VIII rule of England as the head of the Anglican Church:  The Act of Supremacy of 1534 declared the English crown to be 'the only supreme head on earth of the Church in England' in place of the Pope.  Opposition to Henry's religious policies was quickly suppressed in England. A number of dissenting monks were tortured and executed. The most prominent resisters included John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, and Sir Thomas More, Henry's former Lord Chancellor, both of whom refused to take the oath and were subsequently convicted of high treason and beheaded at Tyburn in 1535. Thomas Cromwell, for whom was created the post of "Vicegerent in Spirituals", was authorized to visit monasteries, ostensibly to ensure that they followed royal instructions, but in reality to assess their wealth. Cromwell's commissioners for the suppression of religious houses included Lavton, Pollard and Moyle. The death of Abbot Richard Whyting is just one example of the bloodshed during the suppression. In 1536, an Act of Parliament allowed Henry to seize the possessions of the lesser monasteries (those with annual incomes of £200 or less). These suppressions in turn contributed to further resistance among the English people, most notably in the Pilgrimage of Grace, a large uprising in northern England in October of the same year. Henry VIII promised the rebels he would pardon them and thanked them for raising the issues to his attention, then invited the rebel leader, Robert Aske to have a royal banquet with him. At the banquet, Henry tactfully asked Aske to write down what had happened so he could have a better idea of the problems he would 'change'. Aske did what the King asked, though he had actually just written what would later be used against him as a confession. The King's word could not be questioned (as he was held as God's chosen, and second only to God himself) so Aske told the rebels they had been successful and they could disperse and go home. However, because Henry saw the rebels as traitors, he did not feel obliged to keep his promises. The rebels realized that the King was not keeping his promises and rebelled again later that year, but their strength was not as great and the King ordered the rebellions crushed. The leaders, including Aske, were arrested and executed for treason. Dissolution of the remaining, larger monasteries followed a subsequent authorizing act by Parliament in April 1539.

3.  John Calvin:  But within Geneva itself a struggle took place between those who wanted mild reform (such as no compulsory church attendance) and those who demanded radical reform such as Calvin and Farel. The split was deeper than this however. The mild reformers were called the Libertines and they wanted magistrates firmly in control of the clergy. Calvin wanted a city controlled by the clergy - a theocracy. In 1538, the Libertines won the day and Farel and Calvin fled the city and went to Strasbourg.

Puritan New England:  Puritan oppression, including torture and imprisonment of many leaders of non-Puritan Christian sects, led to the (voluntary or involuntary) "banishment" of many Christian leaders and their followers from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This negative impact of Puritanism on many new colonists had a positive result on American history in that it led to the founding of many new colonies—Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, New Hampshire, and others—as religious havens that were created for devout Christians who wanted to live outside the oppressive reach of Puritan theocracy.

5.  John Knox and Scotland Presbyterianism: That remained the picture until the Scottish Reformation in the early sixteen century, when the Church in Scotland broke with the papacy, and adopted a Calvinist confession. At that point the celebration of the Roman Mass was outlawed.  The revolution resulted in a powerful hatred of the Roman Church. Over the course of later medieval and early modern history violence against Catholics has broken out, often resulting in deaths, such as the torture of Saint John Ogilvie and execution of a Jesuit priest.

I could go on and on, but I think I have made my point - people of all denominations and religions are susceptible to persecuting people of other denominations or religions - it is not the religion, it is the people.

Check out [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism[/url] if you are interested in reading a short history of Anti-Catholicism.

Also, I found this statement, which I agree with completely:

Modern Anti-Catholic polemics

As well as standard Protestant polemics which likened Catholicism to the Anti-Christ and the wh*re of Babylon other themes of modern anti-Catholic controversialists included accusations of paganism, idolatry and conspiracy theories which accuse the church of seeking world domination

After researching this Baxter fellow, he appears to be a decent sort of guy; well educated, yet entrenched in Church of Christ doctrine.  It beats me why he decided to assemble a document full of primarily out of context quotes from Catholic theologians that are not involved in creating official doctrine; I guess Baxter has bought in to the Anti-Catholicism prevalent in his community.

blessings


Yep...I guess it always looks uglier on someone else...

As a history teacher, I am impressed.  Well done.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: DCR on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 12:21:06
You have pulled a document from a different time and presented it in hopes of many here will judge it by our own values and standards.  You simply cannot do this and make a valid argument.  Besides, you never mention why this document was even issued.  What were the circumstances behind it, etc.

You raise a point that has been in my mind all along, with regard to this thread.

The article/tract quoted in the OP, if I'm not mistaken, was originally written in or around 1960.  If memory serves, there was a certain candidate running for president that year... when the fact that he was Catholic was held against him by people at the time.  At the time, I believe there was much suspicion about the RCC in non-Catholic America.  Being Catholic was second worst to being a suspected Communist in the minds of some people at the time. 

But, this candidate ultimately won the election anyway.  His name was John F. Kennedy.

So, the article seems to be a product of its time, in a way.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 12:32:07
Thanks for the recent comments, everyone.  It is nice to see you again Stephanie and Broach972.  I think Janine is right about this thread - it has run it's course.

blessings

I just read your post DCR - great point - I think you nailed it.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 18:41:03
The article/tract quoted in the OP, if I'm not mistaken, was originally written in or around 1960.  If memory serves, there was a certain candidate running for president that year... when the fact that he was Catholic was held against him by people at the time.  At the time, I believe there was much suspicion about the RCC in non-Catholic America.  Being Catholic was second worst to being a suspected Communist in the minds of some people at the time. 

But, this candidate ultimately won the election anyway.  His name was John F. Kennedy.

So, the article seems to be a product of its time, in a way.

Nice try, but your argument is a red herring.

Our Constitution is a product of another time, the 1770's.  Yet we are governed by it, every man and woman in the military promises to uphold it, every elected official affirms he/she will protect and defend it.

Who would be so silly to say a document written over 225 years ago is irrelevant today?

This stated positions of The Roman Catholic Church are still the same.  The doctrine has not changed, the intentions of the Roman Church have not changed.  They are on record as intending the suppress the religious freedom of every non-Catholic as soon as they become the majority.

Don't try to dismiss it, or sweep it under the rug.  The Roman Catholic Church is a threat to our way of life.

That's it.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 18:47:37
The constitution was made to be amended, and is a living document made vital and relevant by the concept of judicial review.  On the whole, this is a strange, strange comparison. 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 18:52:37
The constitution was made to be amended, and is a living document made vital and relevant by the concept of judicial review.  On the whole, this is a strange, strange comparison. 

And the Roman Catholic Church has not "amended" this position.  They still intend to deny religious freedom to non-Catholics at their first opportunity.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Oct 29, 2007 - 20:41:33
Ravenlorre, you never cease to amaze me.

Well, Mistergus, I think that Ravenlorrre has just obliterated your argument and position.  Mistergus, as a teacher and student of history, let me give you a piece of advice--never cite an obscure document unless you know something about it, especially the context in which it was written.  Context is everything.  And never forget, you can never judge what old documents are trying to convey to us by relying on our own standards and values.  These are cardinal rules of studying history and historical documents.

Ravenlorre, I would give anything if my World History Honors and AP World History students had your ability to analyze and make an argument.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 05:41:09
This post was a major waste of time to read.  it says nothing about the Catholic Church renouncing its claim to deny religious freedoms to others once they become the majority.

I found this interesting, though...


(2) By a Catholic State we understand a community which is composed exclusively of Catholic subjects and which recognizes Catholicism as the only true religion. In this case also the relations between Church and State may be different, according as the two powers are closely united for offence and defence, or, while each maintains its independence, are less compactly joined. The first kind of union finds its truest expression in the "religious state", a distinctive feature of the Middle Ages, while the second or looser union may be realized in a constitutional state that admits various denominations and yet retains its Christian character. In view of the difference of the fundamental ideas on which these two forms of state are based, the principles of political tolerance are subject to important modifications.

"...the relations between church and state may be different..."  Now, isn't that interesting?

I've read this mumbo-jumbo you've posted, and found it irrelevant and pointless (regarding our discussion).

A long-winded distraction is not a response.  Try again, okay?

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 06:38:59
It might be nice, also, if you actually want long long long quoted copy-and-paste to actually be read, to alter the blinkin' format fer God's sake!  Insert some white space!

Unless you seek to win over everyone whose eyes are not that great, by simple virtue of your extra-large chunks of script.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 06:43:52
This post was a major waste of time to read.  it says nothing about the Catholic Church renouncing its claim to deny religious freedoms to others once they become the majority.

I found this interesting, though...


(2) By a Catholic State we understand a community which is composed exclusively of Catholic subjects and which recognizes Catholicism as the only true religion. In this case also the relations between Church and State may be different, according as the two powers are closely united for offence and defence, or, while each maintains its independence, are less compactly joined. The first kind of union finds its truest expression in the "religious state", a distinctive feature of the Middle Ages, while the second or looser union may be realized in a constitutional state that admits various denominations and yet retains its Christian character. In view of the difference of the fundamental ideas on which these two forms of state are based, the principles of political tolerance are subject to important modifications.

"...the relations between church and state may be different..."  Now, isn't that interesting?

I've read this mumbo-jumbo you've posted, and found it irrelevant and pointless (regarding our discussion).

A long-winded distraction is not a response.  Try again, okay?

Robert G

You must be blind.  Did you catch the following:

"The Catholic Church recognizes unreservedly the inviolability of constitutions confirmed by oath, of traditional laws and regular religious compacts, because a breach of the constitution, of allegiance, of a treaty, or of an oath is a grievous sin, and because the Christian moral law prescribes fidelity to the State as an obligation strictly binding in conscience."

The entire document was about the Catholic Church's position on the relationship between the Church and State, not to mention the nature of conversion--no one can ever be forced to accept the Catholic faith...period.

Again, you pull a sentence and present it out of context...and what does it prove?

Mistergus, just because you say the sky is yellow doesn't make it so.

I think that this thread has run its course.  Ravenlorre has made his position clear and has provided solid evidence to support it and has done a fine job in destroying your position.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 06:57:52
To look back at different times and places in history and see how things could possibly work out --

In such a way that a powerful entity like the Catholic Church  could possibly get into a position over a civil population --

To dominate, bully, abuse, attempt mind control, rake in more money than ever, legislate by fiat or by having powerful people in place in governement, etc. --

That position, if that is what mistergus is worried about -- That position you cannot destroy, people.  It's happened before and it may happen again.

It's not just a Catholic pattern; un-Catholic religious groups/trends have risen to and abused what had been or what should have been secular power.  Heck, ideologies that weren't supposed to be "religious" have evolved into de facto abusive religions, IMO, if only because of their power structure and efforts at mind control, etc.

But -- to say that at argument about that pattern, that possibility, has been "destroyed", is a little airheaded. 

Now -- y'all can throw documents at each other all you want to, and each side stand up and say to the other, "Nyaaah, nyaaah, I'm right and you're wrong", all day long.  And you can tell each other your document trumps the other guy's document, or your interpretation of the document(s) trumps the other guy's sadly limited intellectual capacity to understand what he's reading...

Is that what y'all are saying?

But -- if only because it has happened before, humans and governments being what they are -- I contend that the argument mistergus is trying to make cannot be totally refuted.

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 08:37:36
is this *sensored* still going around? what a complete waste of words. Who cares what is written on all these worthless documents, and even what is written on their hearts (if it is even true the the Catholics want to take over the world) who has ever beaten God at this game? Some held power for a while, but no one kept domination over the world in a physical manner or a spiritual manner. Last I checked God is still in control, or did i miss a memo? So if God is in control of HIS CHURCH why all the fuss about it, it has been plagued full of false prophets and whores throughout the generations, satan even sending demons to attempt to destroy it and that has not happened, so I think God has got this one people. let go and let God!


Quote:
"the Catholic church is not the power of the church, have we all forgotten who has defeated the enemy and who the enemy is? who is it sitting at the right hand of God?

IF, the church in America looses its freedom it will not be because of the Catholic church, but rather because God allowed us to have our religious freedom takin away, and why? Because we are either asleep (cold) or lukewarm. And if God chooses to use the Catholic church to do so, then that would be His choose. But this is all hinged on 'IF" God chooses to do so, and 'IF' He uses that vichicle to do so, but He could use birds or even stones to do so, if He wanted. But the bottom line, no one can take our freedom unless God allows it to happen.
[/quote]
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 12:06:24
You must be blind.  Did you catch the following:

"The Catholic Church recognizes unreservedly the inviolability of constitutions confirmed by oath, of traditional laws and regular religious compacts, because a breach of the constitution, of allegiance, of a treaty, or of an oath is a grievous sin, and because the Christian moral law prescribes fidelity to the State as an obligation strictly binding in conscience."

Yes, I caught it.

All it says is that the church have to live with the present laws of a state as long as it has no choice.  How about you?  Are you blind?  Did you not catch...


"In some countries, Catholics will be obliged to ask full religious freedom for all, resigned at being forced to cohabitate where they alone should rightfully be allowed to live.  But in doing this the Church will not renounce here thesis, which remains the most imperative of her laws, but merely adapt herself to de facto conditions which must be taken into account in practical affairs…The Church cannot blush for her own want of tolerance as she asserts it in principle and applies it in practice.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 12:11:24
AND THE NONSENSE GOES ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON....WHAT A WASTE!
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 12:40:21
It has come to my attention that I am talking to a brick wall.  I am out.  On to the next topic...
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 13:24:03
I keep up with what's going on in the Catholic Church by a regular viewing of EWTN and by reading Catholic books. I think I can safely say that the American Catholic Church is split between conservatives, moderates and liberals. Basically, the Catholic Church in America is too fractured to gain control, assuming it even wanted such control. Conservative/Moderate Catholics, represented by EWTN, are too busy with such internal struggles to want to take over anyone.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the official Vatican position is that Protestants are saved Christians, albeit not possessing the fullness of the faith that Rome does. They'd be thrilled if we all converted, but don't see a real pressing need to do so.

The countries where the Catholic Church seems to be gaining the strongest headway are in third-world countries.

I respect the late Bro. Barrett, but in his views on Catholicism he was simply wrong. Campbell himself had similar fears in the 1830s and 40s, and he, too, was wrong. Everyone in the CoC was horrified that if JFK was elected the Vatican would take over America and that didn't happen, either, did it? It's all much ado about nothing. It's easier to villify the Catholic Church than it is to understand it. If you pigeonhole everyone who isn't like you as the enemy you don't have to bother with really understanding them or dealing honestly with them.

IMHO the most insidious enemy facing America is not Catholicism but secularism.

Pax.

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 16:42:52
I would suggest that pretty much any "-ism" is a threat.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Tue Oct 30, 2007 - 17:30:47
I respect the late Bro. Barrett, but in his views on Catholicism he was simply wrong. Campbell himself had similar fears in the 1830s and 40s, and he, too, was wrong. Everyone in the CoC was horrified that if JFK was elected the Vatican would take over America and that didn't happen, either, did it? It's all much ado about nothing. It's easier to villify the Catholic Church than it is to understand it. If you pigeonhole everyone who isn't like you as the enemy you don't have to bother with really understanding them or dealing honestly with them.

Lee,

You obviously haven't read the material.  Bro. Baxter is quoting Catholic sources, not non-Catholics.  The stated positions and doctrinal beliefs are clear.  They are not subject to interpretation.  They are what they are, they are undeniable.  If you want to ignore non-Catholics regarding the Catholic Church, fine.  But it's silly to dismiss Catholic authorities themselves, including the Popes.  Your credibility will suffer a major hit.  At least, among those who actually read.

Are we going to have to deal with these issues separately?  The Syllabus of Errors...The Doctrine of Mental Reservation...You'll never learn by keeping your head in the sand.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 11:51:48
It has come to my attention that I am talking to a brick wall.  I am out.  On to the next topic...

Running up against the truth can often feel like a brick wall, can't it?

Oh well, when you're ready to continue this discussion, we'll get into the "Syllabus of Errors", or perhaps..."The Doctrine of Mental Reservation."

Actually...maybe we need to anyway.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 13:58:08
I respect the late Bro. Barrett, but in his views on Catholicism he was simply wrong. Campbell himself had similar fears in the 1830s and 40s, and he, too, was wrong. Everyone in the CoC was horrified that if JFK was elected the Vatican would take over America and that didn't happen, either, did it? It's all much ado about nothing. It's easier to villify the Catholic Church than it is to understand it. If you pigeonhole everyone who isn't like you as the enemy you don't have to bother with really understanding them or dealing honestly with them.

Lee,

You obviously haven't read the material.  Bro. Baxter is quoting Catholic sources, not non-Catholics.  The stated positions and doctrinal beliefs are clear.  They are not subject to interpretation.  They are what they are, they are undeniable.  If you want to ignore non-Catholics regarding the Catholic Church, fine.  But it's silly to dismiss Catholic authorities themselves, including the Popes.  Your credibility will suffer a major hit.  At least, among those who actually read.

Are we going to have to deal with these issues separately?  The Syllabus of Errors...The Doctrine of Mental Reservation...You'll never learn by keeping your head in the sand.

Robert G

They're the Catholic views of 40 or 50 years ago, selectively quoted, not the views of the Catholic Church of today, post Vatican II. Or should we all be so naive as to think that nothing really changed in the Catholic Church as a result of Vatican II? That would be naive indeed. Because its simply a fact that Catholic thinking on many subjects has changed and evolved.

Bro. Baxter's "Cathophobic" views were shared by many Protestants, not just those in churches of Christ. They were a product of that era. No one seriously believes do they, that if John Kerry were ever elected president, the country would suddenly be taken over by the Vatican, any more than they believe that if Fred Thompson were elected the country would be suddenly be taken over by the Church of Christ?

From The Catechism of the Cathoilic Church, Part one, Article 9, Paragraph 3, Section I:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church-for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame." The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body-here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism-do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers. . . . All those who have been justified by faith and Baptism are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of the grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter." Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, comunion with the Catholic Church."  With the Orthodox Churches, this comunion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."



Pax vobiscum.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:00:01
Lee,

I appreciate these quotes acknowledging that the Roman Catholic Church accepts that there are believers not among them.  So what?

There is nothing here to indicate that these non-Catholic believers will be allowed to practice their faith openly once a nation becomes majority Catholic.  In fact, the opposite is true.  The Roman Catholic authorities have made that clear enough.

Where has the Roman Catholic Church renounced it's plans to suppress religious freedoms for non-Catholics?  Until you can produce this, you've got nothing to say that matters.

I don't know why some of you keep throwing out long-winded red herrings that in fact do not address the issue.

Smoke and mirrors, I guess.

Robert G
Title: Roman Catholic Church - "Syllabus of Errors"
Post by: mistergus on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:11:00
Since some are trying (weakly) to deny the Roman Catholic Church intends to suppress religious freedoms, then they should be able to show where the Roman Church has renounced this pronouncement:


                                       Syllabus of Errors

     Pope Pius IX, in 1864, published a famous document entitled, Syllabus of Errors.  This document has been and still is a fundamental part of Roman doctrine and policy.  It contains these shocking declarations of policy:
“The State has not the right to leave every man free to profess and embrace whatever religion he shall deem true.
“It (the State) has not the right to exclude the pontiff or clergy from all dominion over temporal affairs.
“It (the State) has not the right to the entire direction of public schools.
“It (the State) has not the right to separate itself from the Church.
“It (the State) has not the right to uphold any marriage solemnized   otherwise than according to the form prescribed by the Council of Trent, even if solemnized according to a form sanctioned by civil law.

     After stating what the State may not do, then Pope Pius IX went on to state positively what the church could do.
“She (the Catholic Church) has the right to exercise her power without the permission or consent of the State.
“She has the right to employ force.
“She has the right to claim dominion in temporal things for the clergy and the Pope.
“She has the right to deprive the civil authority of the entire government of public schools.
“She has the right of annulling marriages solemnized only by civil contract.
“She has the right to require that the Catholic religion shall be the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all others.
“She has the right to require the State not to permit free expression of opinion.




This is just for starters.  We'll cover some other Roman Catholic statements in the future.

Robert G

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: DCR on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:19:34
mistergus,

Putting aside the disagreements that have been expressed in this thread for a moment...

Now that you have defined what you believe to be the problem (that our religious freedoms are threatened by the RCC), what do you propose that we do about it?
Title: Re: Roman Catholic Church - "Syllabus of Errors"
Post by: Jimbob on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:21:15
http://books.google.com/books?id=HtECAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:23:18
Invade the Vatican? F-16s and M-16s against the Swiss Guard?

Pax vobiscum.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:25:41
Lee,

I appreciate these quotes acknowledging that the Roman Catholic Church accepts that there are believers not among them.  So what?

There is nothing here to indicate that these non-Catholic believers will be allowed to practice their faith openly once a nation becomes majority Catholic.  In fact, the opposite is true.  The Roman Catholic authorities have made that clear enough.

Where has the Roman Catholic Church renounced it's plans to suppress religious freedoms for non-Catholics?  Until you can produce this, you've got nothing to say that matters.

I don't know why some of you keep throwing out long-winded red herrings that in fact do not address the issue.

Smoke and mirrors, I guess.

Robert G

Robert, do you really believe Benedict XVI is just biding his time until he can airlift Swiss Guardsmen into Washington, DC and take over the US Government? Seems to me like Pope John XXIII missed his chance when JFK was elected.

Pax vobiscum.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:31:56
Yeah, mistergus, I have to say that the tenor of your posts about this has been just as frantic and despairing-sounding as those of many "end-timers" when they spread the word about the horrible happenings they expect are unfolding even now...

Exactly what would you have people do about the Catholic Church's intent to suck the life out of the religious freedoms we now enjoy?

(P.S. Lee Freeman -- don't you underestimate that Swiss Guard!   Just because they carry can openers on a stick and wear funny pants don't mean they're not formidable adversaries.)
Title: Re: Roman Catholic Church - "Syllabus of Errors"
Post by: James Rondon on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:32:49
in 1864

Does Roman Catholicism, today, still hold to these positions?
Title: Re: Roman Catholic Church - "Syllabus of Errors"
Post by: mistergus on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 17:40:35
in 1864

Does Roman Catholicism, today, still hold to these positions?

That's what will be interesting to find out.  We're governed by a 225 year Consitution, aren't we?  And when part of it was voided (prohibition) it was amended to reflect that.

Upon reflection, I think rehashing numerous statements quoted in the Baxter tract would be unproductive (in the short term, anyway).  But I do intend to soon repost the Catholic "Doctrine of Mental Reservation", so we can explore whether the Roman Catholic Church still officially believes it's okay for it (the Church) to lie and state untruths.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 22:13:32
How crazy-making can you get?
Where is your evidence that the Catholic Church condones lying?

You really haven't been keeping up, have you?  You really haven't been reading the material, have you?  You haven't read the Catholic doctrine of "Mental Reservation", have you?

Don't worry.  I will educate you.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ravenlorre on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 23:09:12
If you believe that the Catholic Church condones lying and secretly wants to rule the world, how can you stand posting on a message board that not only welcomes Catholics as Christian, but (like the Early Church) uses a Creed developed by the Roman Catholic Church to determine who is Christian and who is not Christian?

Isn't a bit hypocritical for you to post here if you do not agree with the rules of this board?

blessings
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Wed Oct 31, 2007 - 23:30:08
That makes me a maverick, then.

I do not welcome Catholics as Christians.

I welcome anyone who claims to belong to Jesus as a Christian, and will share what I know with them and see what they have to say about what they know.  If they happen to be Catholic, ah well, I won't hold it against them, being one myself.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 06:05:40
If you believe that the Catholic Church condones lying and secretly wants to rule the world...

After this thread calms down, I'll post the Catholic "Doctrine of Mental Reservation".  Then we can explore the issue.

Robert G
Title: Re: Roman Catholic Church - "Syllabus of Errors"
Post by: broach972 on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 06:33:10
Since some are trying (weakly) to deny the Roman Catholic Church intends to suppress religious freedoms, then they should be able to show where the Roman Church has renounced this pronouncement:


                                       Syllabus of Errors

     Pope Pius IX, in 1864, published a famous document entitled, Syllabus of Errors.  This document has been and still is a fundamental part of Roman doctrine and policy.  It contains these shocking declarations of policy:
“The State has not the right to leave every man free to profess and embrace whatever religion he shall deem true.
“It (the State) has not the right to exclude the pontiff or clergy from all dominion over temporal affairs.
“It (the State) has not the right to the entire direction of public schools.
“It (the State) has not the right to separate itself from the Church.
“It (the State) has not the right to uphold any marriage solemnized   otherwise than according to the form prescribed by the Council of Trent, even if solemnized according to a form sanctioned by civil law.

     After stating what the State may not do, then Pope Pius IX went on to state positively what the church could do.
“She (the Catholic Church) has the right to exercise her power without the permission or consent of the State.
“She has the right to employ force.
“She has the right to claim dominion in temporal things for the clergy and the Pope.
“She has the right to deprive the civil authority of the entire government of public schools.
“She has the right of annulling marriages solemnized only by civil contract.
“She has the right to require that the Catholic religion shall be the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all others.
“She has the right to require the State not to permit free expression of opinion.




This is just for starters.  We'll cover some other Roman Catholic statements in the future.

Robert G




Actually Mistergus, the Syllabus of Errors you refer to does not state these things.  It has nothing to do with the desire to suppress freedom or dominate the world.  It is merely a collection of attitudes, philosophies, and religions that the Church deemed in error at that time and threatened the basic principles of Christianity.

You don't have any idea of what you are talking about.  I submit the link for those that wish to truly read what was stated by Pope Pius IX.  Although there may be some disagreements, I seriously doubt that many non-Catholics will have a problem with what he said.  For example, one of the things found in error:

"Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason."

This is just one attitude of that time period that the Pope specifically condemns.

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

By the way, make sure you read within the context of the time period in which it was written...extremely important.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 06:45:08
That makes me a maverick, then.  I do not welcome Catholics as Christians.  I welcome anyone who claims to belong to Jesus as a Christian, and will share what I know with them and see what they have to say about what they know.  If they happen to be Catholic, ah well, I won't hold it against them, being one myself.

(then ravenlorre quotes some of the rules of the Forum, esp. bits of Scripture-backed info drawn from the Nicene Creed)
 
Quote
Quote
Yes, according to the rules of this forum, it does indeed.

blessings

Can you expound/expand a little bit, buddy?  I couldn't tell what you were getting at here.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Bon Voyage on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 06:47:03
That makes me a maverick, then.  I do not welcome Catholics as Christians.  I welcome anyone who claims to belong to Jesus as a Christian, and will share what I know with them and see what they have to say about what they know.  If they happen to be Catholic, ah well, I won't hold it against them, being one myself.

(then ravenlorre quotes some of the rules of the Forum, esp. bits of Scripture-backed info drawn from the Nicene Creed)
 
Quote
Quote
Yes, according to the rules of this forum, it does indeed.

blessings

Can you expound/expand a little bit, buddy?  I couldn't tell what you were getting at here.

Agreement with the Nicene Creed makes one a Catholic?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 06:48:15
I don't get that.  I'm thinking there was a glitch, a dropped sentence in amongst the quotes maybe?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: DCR on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:23:58
That makes me a maverick, then.  I do not welcome Catholics as Christians.  I welcome anyone who claims to belong to Jesus as a Christian, and will share what I know with them and see what they have to say about what they know.  If they happen to be Catholic, ah well, I won't hold it against them, being one myself.

(then ravenlorre quotes some of the rules of the Forum, esp. bits of Scripture-backed info drawn from the Nicene Creed)
 
Quote
Quote
Yes, according to the rules of this forum, it does indeed.

blessings

Can you expound/expand a little bit, buddy?  I couldn't tell what you were getting at here.

I believe ravenlorre was referring back to his prior statement:

on a message board that not only welcomes Catholics as Christian, but (like the Early Church) uses a Creed developed by the Roman Catholic Church to determine who is Christian and who is not Christian?


(Of course, the question of whether the Nicene Creed was "developed by the Roman Catholic Church" is debatable-- the Orthodox would say that they developed it.)
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Bon Voyage on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:26:22
That makes me a maverick, then.  I do not welcome Catholics as Christians.  I welcome anyone who claims to belong to Jesus as a Christian, and will share what I know with them and see what they have to say about what they know.  If they happen to be Catholic, ah well, I won't hold it against them, being one myself.

(then ravenlorre quotes some of the rules of the Forum, esp. bits of Scripture-backed info drawn from the Nicene Creed)
 
Quote
Quote
Yes, according to the rules of this forum, it does indeed.

blessings

Can you expound/expand a little bit, buddy?  I couldn't tell what you were getting at here.

I believe ravenlorre was referring back to his prior statement:

on a message board that not only welcomes Catholics as Christian, but (like the Early Church) uses a Creed developed by the Roman Catholic Church to determine who is Christian and who is not Christian?


(Of course, the question of whether the Nicene Creed was "developed by the Roman Catholic Church" is debatable-- the Orthodox would say that they developed it.)

The Council of Nicea was presided over by a Copt.  The Coptic Church developed it.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:31:23
If you believe that the Catholic Church condones lying and secretly wants to rule the world, how can you stand posting on a message board that not only welcomes Catholics as Christian, but (like the Early Church) uses a Creed developed by the Roman Catholic Church to determine who is Christian and who is not Christian?

Isn't a bit hypocritical for you to post here if you do not agree with the rules of this board?

blessings
Not defending Robert (he'd prefer to do that himself)...but that's not the best argument.  After all, we all use the Old Testament Scriptures handed to us by Israel...a people surely imperfect ...many of whom who are now in denial of the Messiah for whom they waited.  So the fact one gleans some things even from those whom they believe to be in error isn't necessarily hypocrisy, now is it?

I assume, btw, you still enjoy the freedoms of the US Constitution and claim it as your own even though many of the men were terribly imperfect as well.  Does that make you a hypocrite?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:35:10
That makes me a maverick, then.  I do not welcome Catholics as Christians.  I welcome anyone who claims to belong to Jesus as a Christian, and will share what I know with them and see what they have to say about what they know.  If they happen to be Catholic, ah well, I won't hold it against them, being one myself.

(then ravenlorre quotes some of the rules of the Forum, esp. bits of Scripture-backed info drawn from the Nicene Creed)
 
Quote
Quote
Yes, according to the rules of this forum, it does indeed.

blessings

Can you expound/expand a little bit, buddy?  I couldn't tell what you were getting at here.

I believe ravenlorre was referring back to his prior statement:

on a message board that not only welcomes Catholics as Christian, but (like the Early Church) uses a Creed developed by the Roman Catholic Church to determine who is Christian and who is not Christian?


(Of course, the question of whether the Nicene Creed was "developed by the Roman Catholic Church" is debatable-- the Orthodox would say that they developed it.)
Though it's a bit irrelevant. 

1) Rule 6.2 quoted above says we hold no creed but the Bible.  Therefore, while there is an adaptation of the Nicene Creed, it is not recognized "creedally."

2) Rule 6.3 clearly states that the Nicene Creed was based on principles from the Scriptures (not the "Catholic Church"), and goes on to show whereupon those beliefs are based.

::tippinghat::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:37:18
(Well, yeah, but the point was being made re: what ravenlorre thought about the origins of the Creed, not whether or not we/GCM were following the Biblical portions of it as a creed ourselves.)




If I dropped participation and membership in any group I tried to take part in, as soon as I found out that I could only use part of what they support, within myself, because the rest I couldn't in good conscience support....

Well, not only would I have left behind any regular involvement with the Lord's church years ago, I'd also have left Louisiana, the United States, and Earth.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:39:30
And I'm saying that using an old document in the rules doesn't mean necessarily everything she thinks it means.  In other words, using the Nicene statement neither makes the board members who believe the RCC to be in error hypocrites, nor does it issue a blanket statement that all who live in submission to the Pope of Rome are indeed Christians (it makes no statement that all members of any group are Christians).


Cheekiness--> And besides, a few posts ago you said you didn't know what she was saying! ::wink::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:45:04
I still don't.

I know what was said since ::pondering:: then.

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 07:50:09
Then you're ahead of me.  rofl
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 08:47:20
Lee,

I appreciate these quotes acknowledging that the Roman Catholic Church accepts that there are believers not among them.  So what?

There is nothing here to indicate that these non-Catholic believers will be allowed to practice their faith openly once a nation becomes majority Catholic.  In fact, the opposite is true.  The Roman Catholic authorities have made that clear enough.

Where has the Roman Catholic Church renounced it's plans to suppress religious freedoms for non-Catholics?  Until you can produce this, you've got nothing to say that matters.

I don't know why some of you keep throwing out long-winded red herrings that in fact do not address the issue.

Smoke and mirrors, I guess.

Robert G

this is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in awhile. How will they inforce this? Will they go around with guns and kick people out of churches? That is what will need to be done, before most Christians will give up their religious freedom, and even them many still wont. which is why this is just another act of the devil to try to stir up fear and contravercy.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 09:33:41
in 1864

Does Roman Catholicism, today, still hold to these positions?

That's what will be interesting to find out.  We're governed by a 225 year Consitution, aren't we?  And when part of it was voided (prohibition) it was amended to reflect that.

Upon reflection, I think rehashing numerous statements quoted in the Baxter tract would be unproductive (in the short term, anyway).  But I do intend to soon repost the Catholic "Doctrine of Mental Reservation", so we can explore whether the Roman Catholic Church still officially believes it's okay for it (the Church) to lie and state untruths.

Robert G

Robert, you have heard of a little get-together Pope John XXIII and his bishops had back in 1962? It was called Vatican II? I suggest you log on to EWTN and look it up.

Indiscrimiately quoting 140 year-old Catholic documents as if they're binding or normative for the Catholic Church today would be like me posting Campbell's 1826 "The Foundation of Hope and of Christian Union" (in which he says that belief and baptism are the only tests of fellowship and whether a baptized Christian holds Quaker, Methodist, Arminain, Calvinst, Baptist or Episcopalian views is irrelevant) and arguing that that was normative for all modern Churches of Christ.

Pax vobiscum.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 10:47:15
Well, not quite the same.  The pope does speak for the RCC.  Campbell spoke for Campbell.  By that standard, it would be a waste of time for Robert to look up the Vatican II documents, because calling them normative for the whole RCC would be like...see your example.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 12:35:22
Actually Mistergus, the Syllabus of Errors you refer to does not state these things.  It has nothing to do with the desire to suppress freedom or dominate the world.  It is merely a collection of attitudes, philosophies, and religions that the Church deemed in error at that time and threatened the basic principles of Christianity.

You don't have any idea of what you are talking about.  I submit the link for those that wish to truly read what was stated by Pope Pius IX.  Although there may be some disagreements, I seriously doubt that many non-Catholics will have a problem with what he said.  For example, one of the things found in error:

"Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason."

This is just one attitude of that time period that the Pope specifically condemns.

[url]http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm[/url]


I appreciate the link.  Very interesting. 

So how do you account for these Papal statements?


------------------------------------------------------------------------



The Catholic Church  Never Teaches Erroneous Doctrine


     “...Not least among the blessings which have resulted from the public and legitimate honor paid to the Blessed Virgin and the saints is the perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from error and heresy. We may well admire in this the admirable wisdom of the Providence of God, who, ever bringing good out of evil, has from time to time suffered the faith and piety of men to grow weak, and allowed Catholic truth to be attacked by false doctrines, but always with the result that truth has afterwards shone out with greater splendor, and that men's faith, aroused from its lethargy, has shown itself more vigorous than before.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 12:38:20
Lee,

I appreciate these quotes acknowledging that the Roman Catholic Church accepts that there are believers not among them.  So what?

There is nothing here to indicate that these non-Catholic believers will be allowed to practice their faith openly once a nation becomes majority Catholic.  In fact, the opposite is true.  The Roman Catholic authorities have made that clear enough.

Where has the Roman Catholic Church renounced it's plans to suppress religious freedoms for non-Catholics?  Until you can produce this, you've got nothing to say that matters.

I don't know why some of you keep throwing out long-winded red herrings that in fact do not address the issue.

Smoke and mirrors, I guess.

Robert G

this is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in awhile. How will they inforce this? Will they go around with guns and kick people out of churches? That is what will need to be done, before most Christians will give up their religious freedom, and even them many still wont. which is why this is just another act of the devil to try to stir up fear and contravercy.

Anyone care to explain how they will take over the world? i still have not seen an answer. will it be with guns? or are we just suppose to bow down and give up?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 12:41:03
Anyone care to explain how they will take over the world? i still have not seen an answer. will it be with guns? or are we just suppose to bow down and give up?

How did they manage to do it in Mexico?  There's no real religious freedom there.  Only the Catholic Church is allowed to operate without interference.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 12:42:46
Anyone care to explain how they will take over the world? i still have not seen an answer. will it be with guns? or are we just suppose to bow down and give up?

How did they manage to do it in Mexico?  There's no real religious freedom there.

Robert G

first of all that is not entirely true, and second that is not america. and how did they do it? with guns? I really do not know. But I know there are Christian churches and/or groups in mexico.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Dennis on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 13:45:44
Anyone care to explain how they will take over the world? i still have not seen an answer. will it be with guns? or are we just suppose to bow down and give up?

How did they manage to do it in Mexico?  There's no real religious freedom there.

Robert G

first of all that is not entirely true, and second that is not america. and how did they do it? with guns? I really do not know. But I know there are Christian churches and/or groups in mexico.
We send groups down every year.  They have a great time with our Mexican brothers and sisters.  I am not aware of any interference from either the Mexican governement or the Catholic Church.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 13:47:11
i agree, no one seems to want to answer the question of how the RCC will take over the world or america directly, wonder why?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Its Alive on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 14:05:12
In case anyone is remotely interested in knowing the truth about the relationship between the Mexican government and the Roman Catholic Church,  look here:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3736/is_199801/ai_n8766025/pg_1
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 14:12:41
the RRC is in conflict with the government, it has not taken over the government, nor does it seem to have regained many of the rights/power taken away by the government, so it seems to be in a weaker state, but i have more to read.

i still do not see how this would relate to america? How would the RCC literally take control over america's churchs?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mllevaleur on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 14:15:31
The problem with the supposed quotes from the Syllabus of Errors is that they are obviously not direct quotes, because if they were these quotes would be condemned by the syllabus as error.

In reality, the quotes submitted were distortions of what is actually being said, and considering the extremely precise language that is used in such documents, a summary from a third party simply won't do.

For instance, if I say...

[it is error that...] Protestants alone should be allowed to be the President of the United States.

...for someone to reformulate that into a positive statement which says...

"It is a requirement that a Catholic HAS to be the President of the United States."

...would be erronious. That's not what I said at all, I'm simply saying that it should be left open as an option for a Catholic to be president, a Catholic should not be barred from the presidency by virtue of his profession of faith. (Same goes for a Protestant.)

That is what a lot of the actual quotes are saying, that certain Catholic ideas shouldn't be condemned outright (referring to local European philosophies of that time period which often ran counter to Catholicism and Christianity in general), not that it is a requirement that they be implemented worldwide. I know it's shocking to Americans to even dream of a government different than their own that could actually somewhat work, but for a lot of history many states were tied up with the majority religion, and there are of course pros and cons to that, just as there are pros and cons to democracy. For instance, in a Catholic state abortion would never have been made legal. That doesn't mean there has to be a theocracy and that everyone would be forced to be Catholic, it just means the laws were based on Christian Catholic concepts and Catholicism was the way of the land. The document is saying the idea that this kind of government should be outright condemned and that it could never work is erronious. It's not saying Catholics need to take over the world and enforce that kind of government everywhere. But if people got together and decided that's what kind of government they wanted, they shouldn't be stopped from doing that.

Anyway, there is a very interesting article here (http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/syllabus.html) that goes through the syllabus line by line and explains what was meant, and what wasn't meant. Here are some excerpts:

Many of the errors condemned in this section [referring to section IV] were from a time when the popes were both Supreme Pontiffs of the universal church and also temporal princes in their own rights. (Bl. Pope Pius IX was the last pope who was also a temporal prince.) The Italian army seized the Papal States in 1870 and the popes were basically confined to the Vatican until 1929 when the independent Vatican City state was created by the Lateran Treaty of 1929. (Based on a Concordant between the Holy See and the Italian government under Benito Mussolini.) Because of these circumstances, many of these errors are not applicable today as they were when they were issued due to the changed political landscape. This is a significant nuance that is often not taken into account by detractors to the Magisterium...
.........................
[it is error that...]24. The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect. -- Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae," Aug. 22, 1851.

[it is error that...]25. Besides the power inherent in the episcopate, other temporal power has been attributed to it by the civil authority granted either explicitly or tacitly, which on that account is revocable by the civil authority whenever it thinks fit. -- Ibid.

Since 1870, this condemnation is no longer applicable. Vatican City has no army and the Swiss Guard are hardly invasion-force material to put it bluntly. Since Vatican City is a sovereign state, there is some temporal power, however limited. Thus by example all popes since 1929 have exercised some temporal power, and that is adequate to refute the assertion that the Church has no temporal power. As for point twenty-five, Vatican II taught that the episcopate was invested with power from God, not temporal governments. Also, at no time has the Church taught that she has no right to possess temporal power. The Papal States were seized by Italy in 1870 and the popes since that time have had to live with that fact. By no means does this accommodation imply granting assent to condemned proposition twenty-five though.
.........................................
[it is error that...]55. The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church. -- Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852.

In 1864, Pius IX had issued his Syllabus of Errors. Among the condemned propositions was that "the church should be separated from the state and the state from the church." Archbishop Spalding of Baltimore issued a pastoral letter stating that the pope "evidently intended" his words "for the stand-point of European radicals and infidels," who sought to undermine the Church. Far different, he argued, was the First Amendment that laid "down the sound and equitable principle that civil government, adhering strictly to its own appropriate sphere of political duty, pledged itself not to interfere with religious matters, which it rightly viewed as entirely without the bounds of its competency."

Archbishop Spaulding received no rebuke from Rome for his interpretation of point fifty-five of the Syllabus where he pointed out that the target of the condemnation was "European radicals and infidels who sought to undermine the Church." It therefore cannot be taken in and of itself as a condemnation of the sort of separation that a constitutional republic would make between church and state.
............................................ .............
[it is error that...]77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. -- Allocution "Nemo vestrum," July 26, 1855.

The explanation of the great theologian Ven. John Henry Cardinal Newman from his Letter to the Duke of Norfolk will be referenced as Newman spoke on this theme:

When we turn to the Allocution, which is the ground of its being put into the Syllabus, what do we find there? First, that the Pope was speaking, not of States universally, but of one particular State, Spain, definitely Spain; secondly, that he was not noting the erroneous proposition directly, or categorically, but was protesting against the breach in many ways of the Concordat on the part of the Spanish government; further, that he was NOT referring to any work containing the said proposition, NOR contemplating any proposition at all; NOR, on the other hand, using any word of condemnation whatever, NOR using any harsher terms of the Government in question than an expression of "his wonder and distress". And again, taking the Pope's remonstrance as it stands, is it any great cause of complaint to Englishmen, who so lately were severe in their legislation upon Unitarians, Catholics, unbelievers, and others, that the Pope merely does not think it expedient for every state from this time forth to tolerate every sort of religion on its territory, and to disestablish the Church at once? For this is all that he denies.
............................................ ...........
[it is error that...]78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. -- Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852.

This...is an injunction against the civil authority of a Catholic nation. The error is presuming that in a Catholic country it is wise to promulgate civil laws to declare the non-Catholic to have public exercise of their religion. [my note - seeing as we don't really have any Catholic countries around anymore, the point is quite moot. Likewise, that does not mean there could not be freedom of religion, just that it would not be necessary to make civil laws concerning other religions.] Vatican II, with the subject of religious liberty, dealt with the rights of individuals to freedom from coersion from practicing their religion provided that they were not disturbing the public order. Here is how public order was defined by Dignitatis Humanae :

The right to religious freedom is exercised in human society: hence its exercise is subject to certain regulatory norms. In the use of all freedoms the moral principle of personal and social responsibility is to be observed. In the exercise of their rights, individual men and social groups are bound by the moral law to have respect both for the rights of others and for their own duties toward others and for the common welfare of all. Men are to deal with their fellows in justice and civility.

Furthermore, society has the right to defend itself against possible abuses committed on the pretext of freedom of religion. It is the special duty of government to provide this protection. However, government is not to act in an arbitrary fashion or in an unfair spirit of partisanship. Its action is to be controlled by juridical norms which are in conformity with the objective moral order. These norms arise out of the need for the effective safeguard of the rights of all citizens and for the peaceful settlement of conflicts of rights, also out of the need for an adequate care of genuine public peace, which comes about when men live together in good order and in true justice, and finally out of the need for a proper guardianship of public morality.

These matters constitute the basic component of the common welfare: they are what is meant by public order.


Anyway, the whole thing has lots of good info if anyone is interested, I've got laundry to do!
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 14:22:02
i cant believe people got their *___* in a bunch over this OP. the RCC is never going to take over the world or america. plain and simple, all these misquotes and ancient documents are just smoke screens to produce fear or contraversy. i seriously doubt anyone here is in real fear of the RCC, but if you are remember this: (and you can lay this silly fear to rest):

greater is He who is in me, than he who is in the world. And God causes ALL things to work for good to those who love Him. not to mention the many times He said, 'fear not for i am with you always, even to the end of the age, and I will never leave nor forsake you.

So why r u so afraid of the RCC or anything for that matter?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: janine on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 14:32:32
As I say to the "End-Timers", also.  I don't agree with the premise, but even if it's 100% correct and this worrisome thing happens just this way --

What do we want to do about it?

What can we do about it?

What alternative result would we want to achieve?

What alternative result could we achieve?

What difference does it make, in my daily life, if it happens or if it doesn't  How does it change the way I need to live, as a Christian, today?

And, should I dig out a veil to wear to church?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 14:59:48
i agree, no one seems to want to answer the question of how the RCC will take over the world or america directly, wonder why?

I still think it'll be Swiss Guard commandos.

Pax.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 15:11:17
Well, not quite the same.  The pope does speak for the RCC.  Campbell spoke for Campbell.  By that standard, it would be a waste of time for Robert to look up the Vatican II documents, because calling them normative for the whole RCC would be like...see your example.

My point is that a pronuncement of a Pope in 1864 is not necessarily binding upon the faithful of 2007. The Church has changed its opinion on many topics since that time. For example, in 1864 the Vatican was against the concept of democractic government in favor of the God-given, time-tested system of the monarchy. Yet I know of no leader in the Catholic Church nowadays who thinks democarcy is inherently evil or against God's designs. As further examples I thought of at random, the mass is now heard in the vernacular and the Catholic Church since Vatican II has been actively engaged in ecumenical efforts with other Christian confessions. So Robert's quoting 60-100 year-old Catholic documents really only speaks to the Catholic Churchs position on those subjects at the time those documents were written. Like all churches, the Catholic Church doesn't exist in a historical or social vacuum. It changes along with the rest of us. Sure the Vatican's views on fundamental issues has remained fairly constant, however its views on other matters do change; as one final example,  the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary became official dogma only in the 1850s whereas before it was not. So quoting the Catholic Churchs position on the Immaculate Conception from 1840 as if it were normative today would be a mistake.

mlleveleur made some good pts.

Pax vobiscum.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 17:19:02
Lee,

I'll concede the point that Catholic doctrine has evolved over the years.  But did you read the numerous quotes in my last post?  Here are just a couple, both consistent with the others...



     "Nothing ever changes in the eternal Catholic doctrine." Pope John Paul II, LOR, #49, December 9, 1992, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html



     "The Catholic Faith is such that nothing can be added to it, nothing taken away. Either it is held in its entirety, or rejected totally. This is the Catholic faith, which, unless a man believes faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi, PTC:761, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html



Obviously the fact of changing Catholic doctrine and beliefs makes a joke out of the Roman Church's claim to infalliability, as well as the Pope.  So what are we to believe are the true beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church?

This leads me back to the Catholic "Doctrine of Mental Reservation".  In essence, this is the teaching that the Roman Catholic Church has the right to lie (strong word, but accurate) to protect itself and it's secrets.  This doctrine deserves a lot of light to be cast on it.

So what do you think...In light of the Roman Catholic "Doctrine of Mental Reservation", why should anyone believe anything the Roman Catholic Church says?

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Its Alive on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 17:30:42
On the off chance that anybody wants to know the truth about the doctrine of mental reservation,  check here:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: zoonance on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 17:32:14
On the off chance that anybody wants to know the truth about the doctrine of mental reservation,  check here:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm





Truth Shmuth.     We have our minds already made up.....?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 17:45:18
On the off chance that anybody wants to know the truth about the doctrine of mental reservation,  check here:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm


I'm sure you like this site, or you wouldn't have posted it.  But do a Google search, and a whole lot more comes up.

I found this interesting...


Over seven hundred years ago the idea of "mental reservation" was created to protect the Catholic Church in civil court. The doctrine of "mental reservation" claims that it is morally justifiable to lie in order to protect the reputation of the institutionalized Catholic Church. The doctrine has been used quite extensively in modern times to protect the Catholic Church from civil allegations that the institution of the Catholic Church allowed recognized pedophiles to continue to work with children.

When a priest or nun is questioned about acts of clergy that would be considered heinous, such as pedophila, the priest or nuns are counseled by the institutionalized Catholic Church that lying is morally justifible, not a sin, under the doctrine of "mental reservation."



My point here is that there is ample cause to doubt anything the Roman Catholic Church says.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 19:05:49
Please source this.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 19:18:46
I will, then.

http://www.unique-design.net/library/quote/luther.html (http://www.unique-design.net/library/quote/luther.html)

Another page on this site:


http://www.unique-design.net/library/sacred/christ.html (http://www.unique-design.net/library/sacred/christ.html)

Scroll down to "the truth" and note the quotes from The Gospel of Thomas.

'nuff said.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Nevertheless on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 19:40:02
i agree, no one seems to want to answer the question of how the RCC will take over the world or america directly, wonder why?

I still think it'll be Swiss Guard commandos.

Pax.


You're wrong there, Lee.  It's clowns. The world will be taken over by Catholic clowns.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 19:51:31
The Knights Templar!!!

Or maybe the Spanish inquisition, because, you know, no one....
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: spurly on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 20:05:25
I think Jesus will one day set up his kingdom on earth in all its fulness and he will completely suppress all other religions.  Praise God.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mllevaleur on Thu Nov 01, 2007 - 21:02:46
Lee,

I'll concede the point that Catholic doctrine has evolved over the years.  But did you read the numerous quotes in my last post?  Here are just a couple, both consistent with the others...



     "Nothing ever changes in the eternal Catholic doctrine." Pope John Paul II, LOR, #49, December 9, 1992, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
[url]http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html[/url]



     "The Catholic Faith is such that nothing can be added to it, nothing taken away. Either it is held in its entirety, or rejected totally. This is the Catholic faith, which, unless a man believes faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi, PTC:761, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
[url]http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html[/url]



Obviously the fact of changing Catholic doctrine and beliefs makes a joke out of the Roman Church's claim to infalliability, as well as the Pope.  So what are we to believe are the true beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church?


I have to slightly disagree (no surprise there I'm sure) with Lee (although I greatly appreciate his fair and balanced views, as always) because I do indeed believe that the teachings of the Church in essence remain the same. (The quotes used above are not the best encapsulation of what that means. As always, a sound bite does not convey the entirety of the message.)

The thing is, we believe doctrines do not change, but as the world changes the applications of the doctrines may change. A simple example of that would be if there were a doctrine that said "Be generous in your alms giving," depending on the time and place and person, the amount given may vary widely, but may be equally generous.

I believe the article I posted above does a good job of explaining how, when all of the points in the syllabus of errors are taken in their time and historical context, the principals (doctrines) behind them can still be considered valid and even supported and expounded upon by our most recent council (Vatican II). Some of the particulars (the way the doctrines are applied) have changed as is normal, but actual doctrine has not. The syllabus of errors pointed out many problems but didn't offer solutions to them. A document from Vatican II entitled Gaudium et Spes, "outlined a positive agenda while the Syllabus of Errors (and Quanta Cura which accompanied it) merely condemned errors and outlined no actual agenda." The old and the new complement each other and build on each other. We are always learning as we go...the doctrines remain the same, it is our understanding of them that develops, and our application of them that adapts as cultures and times change.

I thought this was a pretty absurd statement when I first heard it, honestly, and thought it would take absolutely no time to refute. But when I looked at things from the other side and stopped using anti-Catholic sources that kept ripping things out of context, I quite surprised myself.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kamakaz on Fri Nov 02, 2007 - 08:20:00
I think Jesus will one day set up his kingdom on earth in all its fulness and he will completely suppress all other religions.  Praise God.

yes, but He already set up His kingdom on Earth, but one day He will be here again as King of all Kings and Lord of all Lords and we will be one body worshiping Him, our head. And He will rule the nations with an iron scepter.


so all of you that are claiming that the RCC will take over the world (apparently by RCCC -RCC Clowns) are you living in fear? What is the big deal? Or have you forgot that God is in control of everything, and the RCCC will not take over nothing unless it is in the will of God, He knows how to run His Kingdom, or do you question that? maybe He will have the RCC take over to wake us up and make our worship and salvation mean more than a hour or two once a week.....to be continued...(unless the RCCC's take over)  rofl
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: billinjackson on Mon Nov 05, 2007 - 19:37:01
Not to be disrespectful to a senior member, but this entire post is silly... (http://content.sweetim.com/sim/cpie/emoticons/0002006E.gif)
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: billinjackson on Mon Nov 05, 2007 - 19:40:09
If you believe that the Catholic Church condones lying and secretly wants to rule the world, how can you stand posting on a message board that not only welcomes Catholics as Christian, but (like the Early Church) uses a Creed developed by the Roman Catholic Church to determine who is Christian and who is not Christian?

Isn't a bit hypocritical for you to post here if you do not agree with the rules of this board?

blessings


Well said, young bird of prey...  (http://content.sweetim.com/sim/cpie/emoticons/00020069.gif)
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Sun Dec 02, 2007 - 22:41:08
I already know about this sort of threat from the RCC. There was a former Jesuit priest named Alberto Rivera that exposed worse things then this.
You can research him at protestant websites on Google. The catholic websites, of course, will deny it. Of Course!!!
It seems to me that the situation is a lot worse then what is in that tract.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Sun Dec 02, 2007 - 22:50:35
On the off chance that anybody wants to know the truth about the doctrine of mental reservation,  check here:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm


I'm sure you like this site, or you wouldn't have posted it.  But do a Google search, and a whole lot more comes up.

I found this interesting...


Over seven hundred years ago the idea of "mental reservation" was created to protect the Catholic Church in civil court. The doctrine of "mental reservation" claims that it is morally justifiable to lie in order to protect the reputation of the institutionalized Catholic Church. The doctrine has been used quite extensively in modern times to protect the Catholic Church from civil allegations that the institution of the Catholic Church allowed recognized pedophiles to continue to work with children.

When a priest or nun is questioned about acts of clergy that would be considered heinous, such as pedophila, the priest or nuns are counseled by the institutionalized Catholic Church that lying is morally justifible, not a sin, under the doctrine of "mental reservation."



My point here is that there is ample cause to doubt anything the Roman Catholic Church says.

Robert G


I read one website where a former catholic monseignor is accusing the RCC of using its diplomatic corps, prelates, ambassadors, who have diplomatic immunity, to push drugs, launder mafia money, and illegally sell weapons. A book exposing this lists the names of several of them that were arrested, but it is hard to prosecute them because of diplomatic immunity.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 06:33:05
I already know about this sort of threat from the RCC. There was a former Jesuit priest named Alberto Rivera that exposed worse things then this.
You can research him at protestant websites on Google. The catholic websites, of course, will deny it. Of Course!!!
It seems to me that the situation is a lot worse then what is in that tract.


Alberto Rivera has been exposed as a fraud...and it was research by Protestants that exposed him a fraud.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 06:34:00
I read one website where a former catholic monseignor is accusing the RCC of using its diplomatic corps, prelates, ambassadors, who have diplomatic immunity, to push drugs, launder mafia money, and illegally sell weapons. A book exposing this lists the names of several of them that were arrested, but it is hard to prosecute them because of diplomatic immunity.

Oh my...where do people come up with this stuff....   rofl

 ::doh::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 10:50:17
I already know about this sort of threat from the RCC. There was a former Jesuit priest named Alberto Rivera that exposed worse things then this.
You can research him at protestant websites on Google. The catholic websites, of course, will deny it. Of Course!!!
It seems to me that the situation is a lot worse then what is in that tract.


Alberto Rivera has been exposed as a fraud...and it was research by Protestants that exposed him a fraud.

No he has not been exposed as a fraud. Many protestants believe he is for real. Read the online book, IS ALBERTO FOR REAL BY, By Sydney Hunter. Find it on search at chick.com.

Alberto Rivera said that protestant churches and pulpits are infiltrated with catholics that pretend to be protestant. So these so called protestants that exposed Rivera; how do you know if they were really protestant or catholics pretending to be protestant?
Rivera said that catholics have been pretending to be members of other religions in this country since the second boat load of pilgrims that arrived.
See online book, THE HISTORY OF PROTESTANTISM,  by Wylie, for the centuries old practice of Jesuits infiltrating other religions and governments.
Nino LoBello, in his book, THE VATICAN PAPERS, says that the vatican spy network is efficient and worldwide. It outclasses even the Russian KGB.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 11:02:31
I read one website where a former catholic monseignor is accusing the RCC of using its diplomatic corps, prelates, ambassadors, who have diplomatic immunity, to push drugs, launder mafia money, and illegally sell weapons. A book exposing this lists the names of several of them that were discovered by the police, but it is hard to prosecute them because of diplomatic immunity.


Oh my...where do people come up with this stuff....   rofl




 ::doh:


You can find out about the mexican catholic monseignor that exposes the vatican mafia connection at this website:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatican/vatican_mafia.htm

Also see Richard Hammer's book, THE VATICAN CONNECTION WITH THE MAFIA, which has the names of vatican clergy and prelates which were discovered by the police to be involved in criminal activity, but could not be arrested because they had vatican diplomatic immunity:

"The Vatican Connection," as the editor Charter Books, N.Y., very well defines it, is an explosive book which contains all the ingredients to stun and amaze any lector -concerning the truth about the Vatican Mafia. In his book, titled "The Astonishing Account of a Billion Dollar Stock Deal Between the Mafia and the Church," he analyzes the criminals.
And when they are discovered by New York Police and by the commander Joseph J. Coffey, an official of the Organized Crime Homicide Task Force, they could not be arrested because they carried a diplomatic passport of the Vatican and accompanied the  -the Roman Pontif and VICARUS FILLII DEI, your HOLINESS etc . . . He cites the names of Cardinals and administrators of the Vatican, places where they meet, conversations, and the copies and documents which prove how the Vatican Mafia functions.



The mafia is an organization of catholics; it started, around Sicily, I think.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 14:39:23
I read one website where a former catholic monseignor is accusing the RCC of using its diplomatic corps, prelates, ambassadors, who have diplomatic immunity, to push drugs, launder mafia money, and illegally sell weapons. A book exposing this lists the names of several of them that were discovered by the police, but it is hard to prosecute them because of diplomatic immunity.


Oh my...where do people come up with this stuff....   rofl




 ::doh:


You can find out about the mexican catholic monseignor that exposes the vatican mafia connection at this website:
[url]http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatican/vatican_mafia.htm[/url]

Also see Richard Hammer's book, THE VATICAN CONNECTION WITH THE MAFIA, which has the names of vatican clergy and prelates which were discovered by the police to be involved in criminal activity, but could not be arrested because they had vatican diplomatic immunity:

"The Vatican Connection," as the editor Charter Books, N.Y., very well defines it, is an explosive book which contains all the ingredients to stun and amaze any lector -concerning the truth about the Vatican Mafia. In his book, titled "The Astonishing Account of a Billion Dollar Stock Deal Between the Mafia and the Church," he analyzes the criminals.
And when they are discovered by New York Police and by the commander Joseph J. Coffey, an official of the Organized Crime Homicide Task Force, they could not be arrested because they carried a diplomatic passport of the Vatican and accompanied the  -the Roman Pontif and VICARUS FILLII DEI, your HOLINESS etc . . . He cites the names of Cardinals and administrators of the Vatican, places where they meet, conversations, and the copies and documents which prove how the Vatican Mafia functions.



The mafia is an organization of catholics; it started, around Sicily, I think.


I am expecting Rod Serling to appear at any moment now...
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 14:41:47

No he has not been exposed as a fraud. Many protestants believe he is for real. Read the online book, IS ALBERTO FOR REAL BY, By Sydney Hunter. Find it on search at chick.com.

Alberto Rivera said that protestant churches and pulpits are infiltrated with catholics that pretend to be protestant. So these so called protestants that exposed Rivera; how do you know if they were really protestant or catholics pretending to be protestant?
Rivera said that catholics have been pretending to be members of other religions in this country since the second boat load of pilgrims that arrived.
See online book, THE HISTORY OF PROTESTANTISM,  by Wylie, for the centuries old practice of Jesuits infiltrating other religions and governments.
Nino LoBello, in his book, THE VATICAN PAPERS, says that the vatican spy network is efficient and worldwide. It outclasses even the Russian KGB.

Is someone here playing a joke?  Surely the person who is stating this is laughing while he types...is this serious!!!  Oh my...I guess people will believe anything these days...this does not even warrant a  response....moving on....
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: seekr on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 14:45:06
As I read this stuff it makes me think about what would happen to us all if Robert were in charge. Would he allow us religious freedom? Think of what would happen to those who opposed HIS beliefs.

Organized religion takes harsh stands no matter what the group and as pointed out by some posters the religious right would be a great detriment to this nation if allowed to be in charge. I always love the scare tactics used by preachers or the posters here to find fault with others.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Mon Dec 03, 2007 - 22:26:22

No he has not been exposed as a fraud. Many protestants believe he is for real. Read the online book, IS ALBERTO FOR REAL BY, By Sydney Hunter. Find it on search at chick.com.

Alberto Rivera said that protestant churches and pulpits are infiltrated with catholics that pretend to be protestant. So these so called protestants that exposed Rivera; how do you know if they were really protestant or catholics pretending to be protestant?
Rivera said that catholics have been pretending to be members of other religions in this country since the second boat load of pilgrims that arrived.
See online book, THE HISTORY OF PROTESTANTISM,  by Wylie, for the centuries old practice of Jesuits infiltrating other religions and governments.
Nino LoBello, in his book, THE VATICAN PAPERS, says that the vatican spy network is efficient and worldwide. It outclasses even the Russian KGB.

Is someone here playing a joke?  Surely the person who is stating this is laughing while he types...is this serious!!!  Oh my...I guess people will believe anything these days...this does not even warrant a  response....moving on....

President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln was not playing a joke, when he said this:  [about the civil war]

"This war would never have
been possible without the sinister influence of the Jesuits. We owe it to
popery that we now see our land reddened with the blood of her noblest sons.
Though there were great differences of opinion between the South and the
North on the question of slavery, neither Jeff Davis nor anyone of the
leading men of the Confederacy would have dared to attack the North, had
they not relied on the promises of the Jesuits, that, under the mask of
Democracy, the money and the arms of the Roman Catholic, even the arms of
France were at their disposal, if they would attack us. I pity the priests,
the bishops and monks of Rome in the United States, when the people realize
that they are, in great part, responsible for the tears and the blood shed
in this war. I conceal what I know, on that subject, from the knowledge of
the nation; for if the people knew the whole truth, this war would turn into
a religious war, and it would at once, take a tenfold more savage and bloody
character. It would become merciless as all religious wars are. It would
become a war of extermination on both sides. The Protestants of both the
North and the South would surely unite to exterminate the priests and the
Jesuits, if they could hear what Professor Morse has said to me of the plots
made in the very city of Rome to destroy this Republic, and if they could
learn how the priests, the nuns, and the monks, which daily land on our
shores, under the pretext of preaching their religion, instructing the
people in their schools, taking care of the sick in the hospitals, are
nothing else but the emissaries of the Pope, of Napoleon, and the other
despots of Europe, to undermine our institutions, alienate the hearts of our
people from our constitution, and our laws, destroy our schools, and prepare
a reign of anarchy here as they have done in Ireland, in Mexico, in Spain,
and wherever there are any people who want to be free."
 
"Is it not an absurdity to give to a man a thing which he is sworn to hate, curse, and
destroy? And does not the Church of Rome hate, curse and destroy liberty of
conscience whenever she can do it safely? I am for liberty of conscience in
its noblest, broadest, highest sense. But I cannot give liberty of
conscience to the Pope and to his followers, the Papists, so long as they
tell me, through all their councils, theologians, and canon laws, that their
conscience orders them to bum my wife, strangle my children, and cut my
throat when they find their opportunity! This does not seem to be understood
by the people today. But sooner or later, the light of common sense will
make it clear to every one that no liberty of conscience can be granted to
men who are sworn to obey a Pope, who pretends to have the right to put to
death those who differ from him in religion."

President Lincoln realized the threat posed to our religious freedoms by the catholic church.
Alberto Rivera said by the time of Lincoln, half of the newspapers in the United States were already controlled by the vatican. It looks like they control much more of the media now.

That quote by Lincoln can be found on several websites on the internet.

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: kensington on Tue Dec 04, 2007 - 03:09:54
I hate, hate Catholicism.  Then again, I hate more or less ALL organized religion.  But Catholicism is really an exception. 

I hate the lies they tell. I do hate that about the religion.

Will they suppress religious freedom? 

They already do, you cannot talk to one of them about the LORD without them making it all into a Catholic thing.  They cannot seem to fellowship with other Christians without having to correct us in theology or to try to convert us... telling us how they were delivered from being a protestant.   ::frustrated::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 04, 2007 - 07:47:15
The quote above, attributed to "several websites" is from "Fifty Years in the Church of Rome" by Charles Chiniquy, for what it's worth.  I thought I recognized it.  I've got a copy here in the office.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Thu Dec 13, 2007 - 10:21:54
I hate, hate Catholicism.  Then again, I hate more or less ALL organized religion.  But Catholicism is really an exception. 


I hate the lies they tell. I do hate that about the religion.

Will they suppress religious freedom? 

They already do, you cannot talk to one of them about the LORD without them making it all into a Catholic thing.  They cannot seem to fellowship with other Christians without having to correct us in theology or to try to convert us... telling us how they were delivered from being a protestant.   ::frustrated::


The Roman catholics are pesecuting and murdering Christians in Mexico. Read the new article at this website:
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/219641.aspx

Christians are being threatened, murdered, with churches being destroyed. Christians have been put in jail and even killed for sharing their faith in Chiapas Mexico.
Property has been confiscated.
Roman Catholicism will still murder people of other religions and persecute them when they see their chance to do so.
The iron fist in the velvet glove.--- Don't be deceived by it.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Thu Dec 13, 2007 - 11:35:29
The Roman catholics are pesecuting and murdering Christians in Mexico. Read the new article at this website:
[url]http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/219641.aspx[/url]

Christians are being threatened, murdered, with churches being destroyed. Christians have been put in jail and even killed for sharing their faith in Chiapas Mexico.
Property has been confiscated.
Roman Catholicism will still murder people of other religions and persecute them when they see their chance to do so.
The iron fist in the velvet glove.--- Don't be deceived by it.


You are just pathetic.  Give me a break!

I just read the article and it sounds to me that a bunch of thugs are terrorizing a group of people.  None of these actions are sanctioned by the Vatican and the article makes no mention that the Vatican is involved in any way.  The Catholic Church rejects the practices of this "traditionalist" group because they mix pagan practices with Catholicism.  This is nothing new, i.e. Santeria.

The town government enacted a law...not the Catholic Church.  Do not confused the actions of a few misguided individuals with the official teachings and practices of the Church.  As a Catholic, I condemn the actions of these individuals and pray that they will change their ways.

I can only shake my head in disgust at both their actions and YOURS.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ann on Fri Dec 14, 2007 - 11:56:06
I suggest that you should understand things in much much more greater detail before making such suggestions.    Really understand it I mean and I don't think you do at this present stage. 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Harold on Fri Dec 14, 2007 - 13:03:00
This morning when I left home for work there was a mini-van full of Nuns waiting to scourge me for daring to believe in Jesus without Rome's approval.

Nah, it was a bad Taco, I woke up and took a Tums.

I can't believe this is still around.

Did anyone call the FBI tip line?  rofl

FTL
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Fri Dec 14, 2007 - 16:10:25
The Roman catholics are pesecuting and murdering Christians in Mexico. Read the new article at this website:
[url]http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/219641.aspx[/url]

Christians are being threatened, murdered, with churches being destroyed. Christians have been put in jail and even killed for sharing their faith in Chiapas Mexico.
Property has been confiscated.
Roman Catholicism will still murder people of other religions and persecute them when they see their chance to do so.
The iron fist in the velvet glove.--- Don't be deceived by it.


You are just pathetic.  Give me a break!

I just read the article and it sounds to me that a bunch of thugs are terrorizing a group of people.  None of these actions are sanctioned by the Vatican and the article makes no mention that the Vatican is involved in any way.  The Catholic Church rejects the practices of this "traditionalist" group because they mix pagan practices with Catholicism.  This is nothing new, i.e. Santeria.

The town government enacted a law...not the Catholic Church.  Do not confused the actions of a few misguided individuals with the official teachings and practices of the Church.  As a Catholic, I condemn the actions of these individuals and pray that they will change their ways.

I can only shake my head in disgust at both their actions and YOURS.


There is too much history behind the activities of the catholic church for it to not be regarded as a threat to religious freedom.
Read the syllabus of errors in the original post on this thread.

[Catholicism has a history of allowing people in foreign lands to mix their religion with catholicism. Just like the pagan religion of ancient rome was mixed with Christianity to form Roman catholicism.]
Catholic Cardinal Newman says in his book, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, that the;
incense, offerings, holy water, seasons of devotion, holidays, and vestments, along with the images and statues, all have a pagan origin. They come mostly from the old pagan religion of ancient Rome.
Catholicism allows people in foreign lands to mix their religions with catholicism. There is nothing new about that. Mixing religions is how roman catholicism came to be what it is in the first place.
For a detailed analysis of the pagan traditions in the Roman catholic religion, Read the online book, THE TWO BABYLONS, by Alexander Hislop, found on metacrawler search engine.
 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 - 17:57:45
[Catholicism has a history of allowing people in foreign lands to mix their religion with catholicism. Just like the pagan religion of ancient rome was mixed with Christianity to form Roman catholicism.]
Catholic Cardinal Newman says in his book, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, that the;
incense, offerings, holy water, seasons of devotion, holidays, and vestments, along with the images and statues, all have a pagan origin. They come mostly from the old pagan religion of ancient Rome.
Catholicism allows people in foreign lands to mix their religions with catholicism. There is nothing new about that. Mixing religions is how roman catholicism came to be what it is in the first place.
For a detailed analysis of the pagan traditions in the Roman catholic religion, Read the online book, THE TWO BABYLONS, by Alexander Hislop, found on metacrawler search engine.
 

Oh if I only had a dime everytime I heard this one...I could retire.  Antiaging, you have got to be kidding.  If you knew anything about the history of the Church and the developments of other religions in general, I doubt you would be making this claim.  Please read the following article.  Maybe you can learn a thing or two.  You will see that this argument just doesn't hold water...

Is Catholicism Pagan?

If few Fundamentalists know the history of their religion—which distressingly few do—even fewer have an appreciation of the history of the Catholic Church. They become easy prey for purveyors of fanciful "histories" that claim to account for the origin and advance of Catholicism.

Anti-Catholics often suggest that Catholicism did not exist prior to the Edict of Milan, which was issued in 313 AD and made Christianity legal in the Roman Empire. With this, pagan influences began to contaminate the previously untainted Christian Church. In no time, various inventions adopted from paganism began to replace the gospel that had been once for all delivered to the saints. At least, that is the theory.

Pagan Influence Fallacy

Opponents of the Church often attempt to discredit Catholicism by attempting to show similarities between it and the beliefs or practices of ancient paganism. This fallacy is frequently committed by Fundamentalists against Catholics, by Seventh-Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and others against both Protestants and Catholics, and by atheists and skeptics against both Christians and Jews.

The nineteenth century witnessed a flowering of this "pagan influence fallacy." Publications such as The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop (the classic English text charging the Catholic Church with paganism) paved the way for generations of antagonism towards the Church. During this time, entire new sects were created (Seventh-Day Adventists, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses)—all considering traditional Catholicism and Protestantism as polluted by paganism. This era also saw atheistic "freethinkers" such as Robert Ingersoll writing books attacking Christianity and Judaism as pagan.

The pagan influence fallacy has not gone away in the twentieth century, but newer archaeology and more mature scholarship have diminished its influence. Yet there are still many committing it. In Protestant circles, numerous works have continued to popularize the claims of Alexander Hislop, most notably the comic books of Jack Chick and the book Babylon Mystery Religion by the young Ralph Woodrow (later Woodrow realized its flaws and wrote The Babylon Connection? repudiating it and refuting Hislop). Other Christian and quasi-Christian sects have continued to charge mainstream Christianity with paganism, and many atheists have continued to repeat—unquestioned—the charges of paganism leveled by their forebears.

Use of a round wafer implies sun worship?

Hislop and Chick argue that the wafers of Communion are round, just like the wafers of the sun worshippers of Baal. They don’t bother to mention that the wafers used by the same pagans were also ovals, triangles, some with the edges folded over, or shaped like leaves or animals, etc. The fact that a wafer is round does not make it immoral or pagan, since even the Jews had wafers and cakes offered in the Old Testament (Gen. 18:1-8, Ex 29:1-2).

Unfortunately for Chick and other Fundamentalists, their arguments backfire. An atheist will take the pagan connection one step further, saying, "Christianity itself is simply a regurgitation of pagan myths: the incarnation of a divinity from a virgin, a venerated mother and child, just like Isis and Osiris, Isa and Iswara, Fortuna and Jupiter, and Semiramis and Tammuz. Beyond this, some pagans had a triune God, and pagan gods were often pictured with wings, as was your God in Psalms 91:4. The flames on the heads of the apostles were also seen as an omen from the gods in Roman poetry and heathen myths long before Pentecost. A rock is struck that brings forth water in the Old Testament . . . just like the pagan goddess Rhea did long before then. Also, Jesus is known as the ‘fish,’ just like the fish-god Dagon, etc." Unless the Fundamentalists are willing to honestly examine the logical fallacies and historical inaccuracies, they are left defenseless. Fortunately, like the attacks on Catholicism in particular, all of the supposed parallels mentioned above self-destruct when examined with any scholarly rigor. If not guilty of historical inaccuracies, they all are guilty of what can be called "pagan influence fallacies."

Anything can be attacked using fallacy

The pagan influence fallacy is committed when one charges that a particular religion, belief, or practice is of pagan origin or has been influenced by paganism and is therefore false, wrong, tainted, or to be repudiated. In this minimal form, the pagan influence fallacy is a subcase of the genetic fallacy, which improperly judges a thing based on its history or origins rather than on its own merits (e.g., "No one should use this medicine because it was invented by a drunkard and adulterer").

Very frequently, the pagan influence fallacy is committed in connection with other fallacies, most notably the post hoc ergo proper hoc ("After this, therefore because of this") fallacy—e.g., "Some ancient pagans did or believed something millennia ago, therefore any parallel Christian practices and beliefs must be derived from that source." Frequently, a variant on this fallacy is committed in which, as soon as a parallel with something pagan is noted, it is assumed that the pagan counterpart is the more ancient. This variant might be called the similis hoc ergo propter hoc ("Similar to this, therefore because of this") fallacy.

When the pagan influence fallacy is encountered, it should be pointed out that it is, in fact, a fallacy. To help make this clear to a religious person committing it, it may be helpful to illustrate with cases where the pagan influence fallacy could be committed against his own position (e.g., the practice of circumcision was practiced in the ancient world by a number of peoples—including the Egyptians—but few Jews or Christians would say that its divinely authorized use in Israel was an example of "pagan corruption").

To help a secular person see the fallacy involved, one might point to a parallel case of the genetic fallacy involving those of his perspective (e.g., "Nobody should accept this particular scientific theory because it was developed by an atheist").

Whenever one encounters a proposed example of pagan influence, one should demand that its existence be properly documented, not just asserted. The danger of accepting an inaccurate claim is too great. The amount of misinformation in this area is great enough that it is advisable never to accept a reported parallel as true unless it can be demonstrated from primary source documents or through reliable, scholarly secondary sources. After receiving documentation supporting the claim of a pagan parallel, one should ask a number of questions:

1. Is there a parallel? Frequently, there is not. The claim of a parallel may be erroneous, especially when the documentation provided is based on an old or undisclosed source.

For example: "The Egyptians had a trinity. They worshiped Osiris, Isis, and Horus, thousands of years before the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were known" (Robert Ingersoll, Why I Am an Agnostic). This is not true. The Egyptians had an Ennead—a pantheon of nine major gods and goddesses. Osiris, Isis, and Horus were simply three divinities in the pantheon who were closely related by marriage and blood (not surprising, since the Ennead itself was an extended family) and who figured in the same myth cycle. They did not represent the three persons of a single divine being (the Christian understanding of the Trinity). The claim of an Egyptian trinity is simply wrong. There is no parallel.

2. Is the parallel dependent or independent? Even if there is a pagan parallel, that does not mean that there is a causal relationship involved. Two groups may develop similar beliefs, practices, and artifacts totally independently of each other. The idea that similar forms are always the result of diffusion from a common source has long been rejected by archaeology and anthropology, and for very good reason: Humans are similar to each other and live in similar (i.e., terrestrial) environments, leading them to have similar cultural artifacts and views.

For example, Fundamentalists have made much of the fact that Catholic art includes Madonna and Child images and that non-Christian art, all over the world, also frequently includes mother and child images. There is nothing sinister in this. The fact is that, in every culture, there are mothers who hold their children! Sometimes this gets represented in art, including religious art, and it especially is used when a work of art is being done to show the motherhood of an individual. Mother-with child-images do not need to be explained by a theory of diffusion from a common, pagan religious source (such as Hislop’s suggestion that such images stem from representations of Semiramis holding Tammuz). One need look no further than the fact that mothers holding children is a universal feature of human experience and a convenient way for artists to represent motherhood.

3. Is the parallel antecedent or consequent? Even if there is a pagan parallel that is causally related to a non-pagan counterpart, this does not establish which gave rise to the other. It may be that the pagan parallel is a late borrowing from a non-pagan source. Frequently, the pagan sources we have are so late that they have been shaped in reaction to Jewish and Christian ideas. Sometimes it is possible to tell that pagans have been borrowing from non-pagans. Other times, it cannot be discerned who is borrowing from whom (or, indeed, if anyone is borrowing from anyone).

For example: The ideas expressed in the Norse Elder Edda about the end and regeneration of the world were probably influenced by the teachings of Christians with whom the Norse had been in contact for centuries (H. A. Guerber, The Norsemen, 339f).

4. Is the parallel treated positively, neutrally, or negatively? Even if there is a pagan parallel to a non-pagan counterpart, that does not mean that the item or concept was enthusiastically or uncritically accepted by non-pagans. One must ask how they regarded it. Did they regard it as something positive, neutral, or negative?

For example: Circumcision and the symbol of the cross might be termed "neutral" Jewish and Christian counterparts to pagan parallels. It is quite likely that the early Hebrews first encountered the idea of circumcision among neighboring non-Jewish peoples, but that does not mean they regarded it as a religiously good thing for non-Jews to do. Circumcision was regarded as a religiously good thing only for Jews because for them it symbolized a special covenant with the one true God (Gen. 17). The Hebrew scriptures are silent in a religious appraisal of non-Jewish circumcision; they seemed indifferent to the fact that some pagans circumcised.

Similarly, the early Christians who adopted the cross as a symbol did not do so because it was a pagan religious symbol (the pagan cultures which use it as a symbol, notably in East Asia and the Americas, had no influence on the early Christians). The cross was used as a Christian symbol because Christ died on a cross—his execution being regarded as a bad thing in itself, in fact, an infinite injustice—but one from which he brought life for the world. Christians did not adopt it because it was a pagan symbol they liked and wanted to copy.

Examples of negative parallels are often found in Genesis. For instance, the Flood narrative (Gen. 6-9) has parallels to pagan flood stories, but is written so that it refutes ideas in them. Thus Genesis attributes the flood to human sin (6:5-7), not overpopulation, as Atrahasis’ Epic and the Greek poem Cypria did (I. Kikawada & A. Quinn). The presence of flood stories in cultures around the world does not undermine the validity of the biblical narrative, but lends it more credence.

Criticism, refutation, and replacement are also the principles behind modern holidays being
celebrated to a limited extent around the same time as former pagan holidays. In actuality, reports of Christian holidays coinciding with pagan ones are often inaccurate (Christmas does not occur on Saturnalia, for example). However, to the extent the phenomenon occurs at all, Christian holidays were introduced to provide a wholesome, non-pagan alternative celebration, which thus critiques and rejects the pagan holiday.

This is the same process that leads Fundamentalists who are offended at the (inaccurately alleged) pagan derivation of Halloween to introduce alternative "Reformation Day" celebrations for their children. (This modern Protestant holiday is based on the fact that the Reformation began when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door in Wittenberg, Germany, on October 31, 1517.) Another Fundamentalist substitution for Halloween has been "harvest festivals" that celebrate the season of autumn and the gathering of crops. These fundamentalist substitutions are no more "pagan" than the celebrations of days or seasons that may have been introduced by earlier Christians.

Historical truth prevails

Ultimately, all attempts to prove Catholicism "pagan" fail. Catholic doctrines are neither borrowed from the mystery religions nor introduced from pagans after the conversion of Constantine. To make a charge of paganism stick, one must be able to show more than a similarity between something in the Church and something in the non-Christian world. One must be able to demonstrate a legitimate connection between the two, showing clearly that one is a result of the other, and that there is something wrong with the non-Christian item.

In the final analysis, nobody has been able to prove these things regarding a doctrine of the Catholic faith, or even its officially authorized practices. The charge of paganism just doesn’t work.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: antiaging on Fri Dec 14, 2007 - 22:36:06
[Catholicism has a history of allowing people in foreign lands to mix their religion with catholicism. Just like the pagan religion of ancient rome was mixed with Christianity to form Roman catholicism.]
Catholic Cardinal Newman says in his book, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, that the;
incense, offerings, holy water, seasons of devotion, holidays, and vestments, along with the images and statues, all have a pagan origin. They come mostly from the old pagan religion of ancient Rome.
Catholicism allows people in foreign lands to mix their religions with catholicism. There is nothing new about that. Mixing religions is how roman catholicism came to be what it is in the first place.
For a detailed analysis of the pagan traditions in the Roman catholic religion, Read the online book, THE TWO BABYLONS, by Alexander Hislop, found on metacrawler search engine.
 

Oh if I only had a dime everytime I heard this one...I could retire.  Antiaging, you have got to be kidding.  If you knew anything about the history of the Church and the developments of other religions in general, I doubt you would be making this claim.  Please read the following article.  Maybe you can learn a thing or two.  You will see that this argument just doesn't hold water...


The title Pope, or Roman Pontiff comes from the pagan Roman religion. The Roman emporers were all pontifex maximus or chief Roman Pontiff. Peter never was a pontiff. In Peter's day Tiberius and Nero were the Roman pontiff's. The title Roman Pontiff is not in the bible. The Bible says that Jesus is the head of the church.

Catholicism says this error:

The Bull Unam Sanctam... Issued by POPE BONIFACE VIII reads as follows: "The Roman Pontiff judges all men, but is judged by no one. We declare, assert, define and pronounce: to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every human creature necessary for salvation that which was spoken of Christ 'thou has subdued all things under his feet' may well seem verified in me... I have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all and above all, so that God himself and I, the vicar of God, have but one consistory, and I am able to do all that God can do." "Christ entrusted His office to the chief pontiff;... but all power in heaven and in earth has been given to Christ;... therefore the chief pontiff, who is His vicar, will have this power." Corpus Juris chap. 1 column 29, translated from a gloss on the words Porro Subesse Romano Pontiff "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII "All the names which are attributed to Christ in Scripture, inplying His supremacy over the church, are also attributed to the Pope." Bellamin, "On the Authority of Councils," book 2, Chapter 17. "For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth." Labbe and Cossart's "History of the Councils." Vol. XIV, col. 109 The title "Lord God the Pope" can be found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4, Declaramus.

This is what the bible says about someone pretending to be God on Earth:

II Thes. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Read this book:
[Peter's Tomb Recently Discovered in Jerusalem, published by F. Paul Peterson, P O Box 7351, Ft. Wayne IN 46807, copyright 1960
The apostle Peter's body was not buried at Rome. There is no proof that Peter was ever in Rome.]
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ann on Sat Dec 15, 2007 - 04:07:23
have you people ever read the book of ACTS in the Bible.  The early Christians. The Roman Catholic Church.  You guys are the break away religion that set up rules to suit yourselves as you did not like the original rules.  Read about Paul!! Or have you endoctrinated that too  to suit yourselves?

I am not going to go down your road of arguing why the differences are worse than each other.  Call yourselves Christians. Then start behaving like Christians and love one another!  People might start taking you seriously then.  Suppression indeed! grow up and be mature and don't be brain washed by these silly articles that are designed to deliberately stirr you up to believe you are holier than the rest. 

one guy on these message boards appealed to peace and love.  there is not much sign of it on this thread.  show me how christian you really are since you love saying that you are saved and quite happy to ask others if they are saved.  Well am asking you now to take a read through the posts especially the ones against the Roman Catholic Church and ask yourselves this soul searching question.  Are you really saved if you can come up with such horrible thoughts of these against other people? 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: ann on Sat Dec 15, 2007 - 05:12:44
dont get me wrong. I am as against people killing one another as much as you all are.  But I am also very aware of articles written to stirr us up into hating other religions.   Okay so some people have had some very bad experiences within the Roman Catholic Church and I don't underestimate that.  But some people have had very bad life experiences. Yes some hate their lives because of their bad experiences.  I wish I could name famous people who have turned their bad experience into a good one.
I thought Christianity was a little bit about peace and love.  I came away from this board a couple of months ago as I was getting somewhat frustrated over the persecution of the Roman Catholic Church and arguments over whose baptism is the best form of baptism.  I did fall into the trap of thinking that it will be better a couple of months down the line and the people here will have moved on from hating and hurting.  But to be honest there doesn't appear to be much change. I hope that you guys will set out to prove me very wrong and you really are into peace and love.  Okay so the world is not a rose garden.  That is partly why we are here, to bring some love into a cold and bleak world.  But if the non Christians only hear us argue amongst ourselves about who is better than who, then are we teaching them anything more than they already know?  They will say that the christian is no better than themselves so why would they change.  I am appealing to you people to wake up today since it is only 5.15 in America, and start today's message boards afresh and see where we can all sit down together so to speak and work out how we can work together to share our love of God through Jesus Christ his only son, into the world that we share.  Can't be that difficult since there a lot of us internationally, rather than this silly hatred of other christian religions.... please ::preachit::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Mon Dec 17, 2007 - 18:24:33
We Protestants have no business removing the speck in Catholicism's eye while there's a Redwood stuck in ours!

The Pope doesn't "pretend to be God," he believes he is the Vicar of Christ on earth, the chief Pastor of  the Church. And no, the Catholic Church is NOT pagan in origin.

I'm all for voicing objections to views of other denominations one believes are wrong, but they should be legitimate objections to legimitate teachings, not caricatures of what that other denomination teaches. Anyone can google a few online documents or leaf through a few books and tracts by a denomination and "prove" they're apostate. And finding polemic works is easy!


After someone has carefully studied a faith tradition such as Catholicism, then they are in a position to object all they like, but not until they really have a good idea of what they're objecting to.

Pax.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Mon Dec 17, 2007 - 23:12:18
We Protestants have no business removing the speck in Catholicism's eye while there's a Redwood stuck in ours!

The Pope doesn't "pretend to be God," he believes he is the Vicar of Christ on earth, the chief Pastor of  the Church. And no, the Catholic Church is NOT pagan in origin.

I'm all for voicing objections to views of other denominations one believes are wrong, but they should be legitimate objections to legimitate teachings, not caricatures of what that other denomination teaches. Anyone can google a few online documents or leaf through a few books and tracts by a denomination and "prove" they're apostate. And finding polemic works is easy!


After someone has carefully studied a faith tradition such as Catholicism, then they are in a position to object all they like, but not until they really have a good idea of what they're objecting to.

Pax.
Having met the criteria you deemed necessary to comment, I should be free to do so.

I agree with your first statement that Protestantism today is in as pitiful condition as Romanism is, and that is the way it was prophesied to be.

I also agree with your second statement, except that the word Vicar actually means “in the place of or substitute
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 05:59:40
Lee,

You comment about familiarity with the Catholics and their history brings up a question for me, independent of others' comments and views.  Suppose one does read quite a bit of history, does even read the current catechism, etc. and maybe even is ex-Catholic, and still holds beliefs that it has born fruit that seems opposed to the very gospel itself?  Will the bar of what one can examine and criticize then move to some other spot? 

Certainly there are things said that are unfair, and based on hearsay.  That should be dismissed outright.  But what about when one looks at the very real history of the burning of heretics, the manipulation of governments, the oppressive tax collecting of the middle ages, and on and on?  Sure revisionists have tried to erase their import, but this is confirmed world history 101, and these are not the sort of things that one simply nonchalantly brushes aside.  The Reformers sure didn't, and many of them were Catholics until they could stomach the fruit no more.

Now, to be fair, because that is what they once did doesn't mean that is what they currently are doing, or would ever do again, but if history teaches us anything, it is that we ignore the brutalities of history at our own peril and naiveté.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 06:44:05
Certainly there are things said that are unfair, and based on hearsay.  That should be dismissed outright.  But what about when one looks at the very real history of the burning of heretics, the manipulation of governments, the oppressive tax collecting of the middle ages, and on and on?  Sure revisionists have tried to erase their import, but this is confirmed world history 101, and these are not the sort of things that one simply nonchalantly brushes aside.  The Reformers sure didn't, and many of them were Catholics until they could stomach the fruit no more.

There was a time when slavery was an honored and accepted institution in the South and if my memory serves me correctly, I don't think that the majority of Christians, mostly Protestant, in the South were working to actively abolish it.  As a matter of fact, the Christian faith was often used to support and sanction it.

As a teacher and student of history, I always warn my students to never judge history through our own eyes and values.  Mankind has come a long way despite its history of barbarism and brutality.  No doubt that the Catholic Church has its own blemishes where history is concerned.  Some historical events have been fabricated or skewed just to discredit the Church, i.e. Pope Pius XII and the Jews during World War II.

As a new convert to the Catholic faith, I was very much aware of the dark history of the Church.  However, it was history that ironically started my journey that resulted in where I am now.

I appreciate Lee's comments, and I would like to make one lasting observation.  It amazes me that there hasn't been any blatant anti-Protestantism.  Many of the Catholics on this forum have attempted to teach what Catholicism really believes.  I am just privileged to be a part of this forum because I have been blocked from other forums just becaue I was Catholic.  I commend this forum for being open, and I am grateful for that.

Much of the anti-Catholic material is quite brutal, downright offensive, and in many cases, just plain wrong.  Catholics have enormous respect for our Protestant brethren despite our disagreements and differences.  We can debate and discuss matters of theology in a civilized way without resorting to the attacks that are often launched.  It also amazes me that even though the theology of Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity is almost identical, it is Catholicism that recieves much of the attack.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: DCR on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 06:50:57
Now, to be fair, because that is what they once did doesn't mean that is what they currently are doing, or would ever do again, but if history teaches us anything, it is that we ignore the brutalities of history at our own peril and naiveté.

Yet, as a counterpoint to that... to how many generations is guilt inherited?  Or, is guilt even inherited?

Not being sure of the present-day Vatican's view of some of the past actions of the Catholic Church that we're describing here, I can tell you that I've observed Catholics condemn past actions in church history... even to the point of acknowledging that there have been corrupt popes, corruption in church hierarchy, etc.

If it is found that my great great great great grandfather murdered someone, I don't know if that means that I should be viewed with extra suspicion, as a result.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 06:52:56
I agree with your first statement that Protestantism today is in as pitiful condition as Romanism is, and that is the way it was prophesied to be.

First, let's get our teminology right.  I am not a Roman.  I am a Catholic.  Did you know that not all Catholics are "Roman" Catholics?  As a matter of fact, the word "Roman" was not used until the Reformation.

You might want to research a little more.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 07:04:51
I think the following article will be of interest.

The Inquisition

Sooner or later, any discussion of apologetics with Fundamentalists will address the Inquisition. To non-Catholics it is a scandal; to Catholics, an embarrassment; to both, a confusion. It is a handy stick for Catholic-bashing, simply because most Catholics seem at a loss for a sensible reply. This tract will set the record straight.

There have actually been several different inquisitions. The first was established in 1184 in southern France as a response to the Catharist heresy. This was known as the Medieval Inquisition, and it was phased out as Catharism disappeared.

Quite separate was the Roman Inquisition, begun in 1542. It was the least active and most benign of the three variations.

Separate again was the infamous Spanish Inquisition, started in 1478, a state institution used to identify conversos—Jews and Moors (Muslims) who pretended to convert to Christianity for purposes of political or social advantage and secretly practiced their former religion. More importantly, its job was also to clear the good names of many people who were falsely accused of being heretics. It was the Spanish Inquisition that, at least in the popular imagination, had the worst record of fulfilling these duties.

The various inquisitions stretched through the better part of a millennia, and can collectively be called "the Inquisition."

The Main Sources

Fundamentalists writing about the Inquisition rely on books by Henry C. Lea (1825–1909) and G. G. Coulton (1858–1947). Each man got most of the facts right, and each made progress in basic research, so proper credit should not be denied them. The problem is that they did not weigh facts well, because they harbored fierce animosity toward the Church—animosity that had little to do with the Inquisition itself.

The contrary problem has not been unknown. A few Catholic writers, particularly those less interested in digging for truth than in diffusing a criticism of the Church, have glossed over incontrovertible facts and tried to whitewash the Inquisition. This is as much a disservice to the truth as an exaggeration of the Inquisition’s bad points. These well-intentioned, but misguided, apologists are, in one respect, much like Lea, Coulton, and contemporary Fundamentalist writers. They fear, while the others hope, that the facts about the Inquisition might prove the illegitimacy of the Catholic Church.

Don’t Fear the Facts

But the facts fail to do that. The Church has nothing to fear from the truth. No account of foolishness, misguided zeal, or cruelty by Catholics can undo the divine foundation of the Church, though, admittedly, these things are stumbling blocks to Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

What must be grasped is that the Church contains within itself all sorts of sinners and knaves, and some of them obtain positions of responsibility. Paul and Christ himself warned us that there would be a few ravenous wolves among Church leaders (Acts 20:29; Matt. 7:15).

Fundamentalists suffer from the mistaken notion that the Church includes only the elect. For them, sinners are outside the doors. Locate sinners, and you locate another place where the Church is not.

Thinking that Fundamentalists might have a point in their attacks on the Inquisition, Catholics tend to be defensive. This is the wrong attitude; rather, we should learn what really happened, understand events in light of the times, and then explain to anti-Catholics why the sorry tale does not prove what they think it proves.

Phony Statistics

Many Fundamentalists believe, for instance, that more people died under the Inquisition than in any war or plague; but in this they rely on phony "statistics" generated by one-upmanship among anti-Catholics, each of whom, it seems, tries to come up with the largest number of casualties.

But trying to straighten out such historical confusions can take one only so far. As Ronald Knox put it, we should be cautious, "lest we should wander interminably in a wilderness of comparative atrocity statistics." In fact, no one knows exactly how many people perished through the various Inquisitions. We can determine for certain, though, one thing about numbers given by Fundamentalists: They are far too large. One book popular with Fundamentalists claims that 95 million people died under the Inquisition.

The figure is so grotesquely off that one immediately doubts the writer’s sanity, or at least his grasp of demographics. Not until modern times did the population of those countries where the Inquisitions existed approach 95 million.

Inquisitions did not exist in Northern Europe, Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, or England, being confined mainly to southern France, Italy, Spain, and a few parts of the Holy Roman Empire. The Inquisition could not have killed that many people because those parts of Europe did not have that many people to kill!

Furthermore, the plague, which killed a third of Europe’s population, is credited by historians with major changes in the social structure. The Inquisition is credited with few—precisely because the number of its victims was comparitively small. In fact, recent studies indicate that at most there were only a few thousand capital sentences carried out for heresy in Spain, and these were over the course of several centuries.

What’s the Point?

Ultimately, it may be a waste of time arguing about statistics. Instead, ask Fundamentalists just what they think the existence of the Inquisition demonstrates. They would not bring it up in the first place unless they thought it proves something about the Catholic Church. And what is that something? That Catholics are sinners? Guilty as charged. That at times people in positions of authority have used poor judgment? Ditto. That otherwise good Catholics, afire with zeal, sometimes lose their balance? All true, but such charges could be made even if the Inquisition had never existed and perhaps could be made of some Fundamentalists.

Fundamentalist writers claim the existence of the Inquisition proves the Catholic Church could not be the Church founded by our Lord. They use the Inquisition as a good—perhaps their best—bad example. They think this shows that the Catholic Church is illegitimate. At first blush it might seem so, but there is only so much mileage in a ploy like that; most people see at once that the argument is weak. One reason Fundamentalists talk about the Inquisition is that they take it as a personal attack, imagining it was established to eliminate (yes, you guessed it) the Fundamentalists themselves.

Not "Bible Christians"

They identify themselves with the Catharists (also known as the Albigensians), or perhaps it is better to say they identify the Catharists with themselves. They think the Catharists were twelfth-century Fundamentalists and that Catholics did to them what they would do to Fundamentalists today if they had the political strength they once had.

This is a fantasy. Fundamentalist writers take one point—that Catharists used a vernacular version of the Bible—and conclude from it that these people were "Bible Christians." In fact, theirs was a curious religion that apparently (no one knows for certain) came to France from what is now Bulgaria. Catharism was a blend of Gnosticism, which claimed to have access to a secret source of religious knowledge, and of Manichaeism, which said matter is evil. The Catharists believed in two gods: the "good" God of the New Testament, who sent Jesus to save our souls from being trapped in matter; and the "evil" God of the Old Testament, who created the material world in the first place. The Catharists’ beliefs entailed serious—truly civilization-destroying—social consequences.

Marriage was scorned because it legitimized sexual relations, which Catharists identified as the Original Sin. But fornication was permitted because it was temporary, secret, and was not generally approved of; while marriage was permanent, open, and publicly sanctioned.

The ramifications of such theories are not hard to imagine. In addition, ritualistic suicide was encouraged (those who would not take their own lives were frequently "helped" along), and Catharists refused to take oaths, which, in a feudal society, meant they opposed all governmental authority. Thus, Catharism was both a moral and a political danger.

Even Lea, so strongly opposed to the Catholic Church, admitted: "The cause of orthodoxy was the cause of progress and civilization. Had Catharism become dominant, or even had it been allowed to exist on equal terms, its influence could not have failed to become disastrous." Whatever else might be said about Catharism, it was certainly not the same as modern Fundamentalism, and Fundamentalist sympathy for this destructive belief system is sadly misplaced.

The Real Point

Many discussions about the Inquisition get bogged down in numbers and many Catholics fail to understand what Fundamentalists are really driving at. As a result, Catholics restrict themselves to secondary matters. Instead, they should force the Fundamentalists to say explicitly what they are trying to prove.

However, there is a certain utility—though a decidedly limited one—in demonstrating that the kinds and degrees of punishments inflicted by the Spanish Inquisition were similar to (actually, even lighter than) those meted out by secular courts. It is equally true that, despite what we consider the Spanish Inquisition’s lamentable procedures, many people preferred to have their cases tried by ecclesiastical courts because the secular courts had even fewer safeguards. In fact, historians have found records of people blaspheming in secular courts of the period so they could have their case transferred to an ecclesiastical court, where they would get a better hearing.

The crucial thing for Catholics, once they have obtained some appreciation of the history of the Inquisition, is to explain how such an institution could have been associated with a divinely established Church and why it is not proper to conclude, from the existence of the Inquisition, that the Catholic Church is not the Church of Christ. This is the real point at issue, and this is where any discussion should focus.

To that end, it is helpful to point out that it is easy to see how those who led the Inquisitions could think their actions were justified. The Bible itself records instances where God commanded that formal, legal inquiries—that is, inquisitions—be carried out to expose secret believers in false religions. In Deuteronomy 17:2–5 God said: "If there is found among you, within any of your towns which the Lord your God gives you, a man or woman who does what is evil in the sight of the Lord your God, in transgressing his covenant, and has gone and served other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the host of heaven, which I have forbidden, and it is told you and you hear of it; then you shall inquire diligently [note that phrase: "inquire diligently"], and if it is true and certain that such an abominable thing has been done in Israel, then you shall bring forth to your gates that man or woman who has done this evil thing, and you shall stone that man or woman to death with stones."

It is clear that there were some Israelites who posed as believers in and keepers of the covenant with Yahweh, while inwardly they did not believe and secretly practiced false religions, and even tried to spread them (cf. Deut. 13:6–11). To protect the kingdom from such hidden heresy, these secret practitioners of false religions had to be rooted out and expelled from the community. This directive from the Lord applied even to whole cities that turned away from the true religion (Deut. 13:12–18). Like Israel, medieval Europe was a society of Christian kingdoms that were formally consecrated to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is therefore quite understandable that these Catholics would read their Bibles and conclude that for the good of their Christian society they, like the Israelites before them, "must purge the evil from the midst of you" (Deut. 13:5, 17:7, 12). Paul repeats this principle in 1 Corinthians 5:13.

These same texts were interpreted similarly by the first Protestants, who also tried to root out and punish those they regarded as heretics. Luther and Calvin both endorsed the right of the state to protect society by purging false religion. In fact, Calvin not only banished from Geneva those who did not share his views, he permitted and in some cases ordered others to be executed for "heresy" (e.g. Jacques Gouet, tortured and beheaded in 1547; and Michael Servetus, burned at the stake in 1553). In England and Ireland, Reformers engaged in their own ruthless inquisitions and executions. Conservative estimates indicate that thousands of English and Irish Catholics were put to death—many by being hanged, drawn, and quartered—for practicing the Catholic faith and refusing to become Protestant. An even greater number were forced to flee to the Continent for their safety. We point this out to show that the situation was a two-way street; and both sides easily understood the Bible to require the use of penal sanctions to root out false religion from Christian society.

The fact that the Protestant Reformers also created inquisitions to root out Catholics and others who did not fall into line with the doctrines of the local Protestant sect shows that the existence of an inquisition does not prove that a movement is not of God. Protestants cannot make this claim against Catholics without having it backfire on themselves. Neither can Catholics make such a charge against Protestants. The truth of a particular system of belief must be decided on other grounds.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 07:08:50
Now, to be fair, because that is what they once did doesn't mean that is what they currently are doing, or would ever do again, but if history teaches us anything, it is that we ignore the brutalities of history at our own peril and naiveté.

Yet, as a counterpoint to that... to how many generations is guilt inherited?  Or, is guilt even inherited?

Not being sure of the present-day Vatican's view of some of the past actions of the Catholic Church that we're describing here, I can tell you that I've observed Catholics condemn past actions in church history... even to the point of acknowledging that there have been corrupt popes, corruption in church hierarchy, etc.

If it is found that my great great great great grandfather murdered someone, I don't know if that means that I should be viewed with extra suspicion, as a result.
We're dealing with an institution, not an individual, and historical actions over centuries, not and individual act, so I'm not sure that carries over directly.  If it did, why dd you occasionally have to deal with Foy Wallace & McGarvey's fruit?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 07:20:13
Certainly there are things said that are unfair, and based on hearsay.  That should be dismissed outright.  But what about when one looks at the very real history of the burning of heretics, the manipulation of governments, the oppressive tax collecting of the middle ages, and on and on?  Sure revisionists have tried to erase their import, but this is confirmed world history 101, and these are not the sort of things that one simply nonchalantly brushes aside.  The Reformers sure didn't, and many of them were Catholics until they could stomach the fruit no more.

There was a time when slavery was an honored and accepted institution in the South and if my memory serves me correctly, I don't think that the majority of Christians, mostly Protestant, in the South were working to actively abolish it.  As a matter of fact, the Christian faith was often used to support and sanction it.

As a teacher and student of history, I always warn my students to never judge history through our own eyes and values.  Mankind has come a long way despite its history of barbarism and brutality.  No doubt that the Catholic Church has its own blemishes where history is concerned.  Some historical events have been fabricated or skewed just to discredit the Church, i.e. Pope Pius XII and the Jews during World War II.

As a new convert to the Catholic faith, I was very much aware of the dark history of the Church.  However, it was history that ironically started my journey that resulted in where I am now.

I appreciate Lee's comments, and I would like to make one lasting observation.  It amazes me that there hasn't been any blatant anti-Protestantism.  Many of the Catholics on this forum have attempted to teach what Catholicism really believes.  I am just privileged to be a part of this forum because I have been blocked from other forums just becaue I was Catholic.  I commend this forum for being open, and I am grateful for that.

Much of the anti-Catholic material is quite brutal, downright offensive, and in many cases, just plain wrong.  Catholics have enormous respect for our Protestant brethren despite our disagreements and differences.  We can debate and discuss matters of theology in a civilized way without resorting to the attacks that are often launched.  It also amazes me that even though the theology of Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity is almost identical, it is Catholicism that recieves much of the attack.
Well, I lived in Russia and am too familiar with some of the ROC's past actions not to hold their feet to the fire, too, Broach.  Don't worry, they won't be put to any less scrutiny. ::wink::

To the rest of you post, I always appreciate you posts, even though we come at this from very different angles.  Please don't take my question to Lee as siding with others in the thread, hence my first sentence.  What I'm asking him is what is the practical side of things when people still hold such very strong views, and it's not out of ignorance of history, but knowledge of it.

And, while I didn't approach it, there is another angle...as a Christian, some of that history is mine, too.  When I'm talking to a guy over at the college campus about Christianity, he doesn't give me the luxury of "Oh, you're part of the RM, so I know the Crusades had nothing to do with you," now does he?  Nope.  So in some ways, we all have to deal with that history. 

I think Mitt Romney actually set a good example of this last week.  Rather than run from his church's past, he expressed his displeasure (understatement) at their historical actions, and his delight at their change of values.  I'm certainly willing to recognize that the RCC has moved away from such actions.  I also, though, certainly understand why people stumble over the history and abuses of the past (which were real, though the Catholics were hardly alone in them).


(dog gone it I knew that question would folks all hinky, but I had to ask ::doh:: ::noworries::)
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 07:22:33
I agree with your first statement that Protestantism today is in as pitiful condition as Romanism is, and that is the way it was prophesied to be.

First, let's get our teminology right.  I am not a Roman.  I am a Catholic.  Did you know that not all Catholics are "Roman" Catholics?  As a matter of fact, the word "Roman" was not used until the Reformation.

You might want to research a little more.
Broach, you may find this is habit.  I also sometimes use the term, but that's not a slight.  It's because I live in a very Catholic community (40%) and even the buildings around here say Roman Catholic Church and RCC is a common abbreviation among them.  So please excuse me if the habit wins over my memory of your hangup on this point. ::tippinghat::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: DCR on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 07:37:45
Now, to be fair, because that is what they once did doesn't mean that is what they currently are doing, or would ever do again, but if history teaches us anything, it is that we ignore the brutalities of history at our own peril and naiveté.

Yet, as a counterpoint to that... to how many generations is guilt inherited?  Or, is guilt even inherited?

Not being sure of the present-day Vatican's view of some of the past actions of the Catholic Church that we're describing here, I can tell you that I've observed Catholics condemn past actions in church history... even to the point of acknowledging that there have been corrupt popes, corruption in church hierarchy, etc.

If it is found that my great great great great grandfather murdered someone, I don't know if that means that I should be viewed with extra suspicion, as a result.
We're dealing with an institution, not an individual, and historical actions over centuries, not and individual act, so I'm not sure that carries over directly.


But, we're talking about actions and decisions of individuals within that institution.  If someone condemned the policies of past presidential administrations, is that justification for leveling the condemnation against the present-day U.S. and all things American, including you and me as present-day Americans?  There was once a federal policy of removing and exiling American Indians from their tribal lands to reservations.  I'm sure many would find such actions condemnable today.  Should the United States as an institution now be held with suspicion as a result, because of the actions of past leadership?

Of course, flaws can be found in nearly any analogy.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 08:07:17
Don't native Americans do just that?  And don't many on this forum do just that with regard to RM churches?  It just seems to me that claiming it's unfair for people to bring up real history is a bit unfair itself.  And, it's a bit pie in the sky to think that everyone will read that history the same way.  Better, istm, to deal with it head on than to ask people to ignore it (which is what it sometimes seems some here are asking people to do).

"It is a mistake to think that the past is dead. Nothing that has ever happened is quite without influence at this moment. The present is merely the past rolled up and concentrated in this second of time. You, too, are your past; often your face is your autobiography; you are what you are because of what you have been; because of your heredity stretching back into forgotten generations; because of every element of environment that has affected you, every man or woman that has met you, every book that you have read, every experience that you have had; all these are accumulated in your memory, your body, your character, your soul. So with a city, a country, and a race; it is its past, and cannot be understood without it." W. Durant

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying that one acts as though the past is the present and the attitudes behind the actions of the past are still present.  What I'm saying is, you've got to understand why people trip over this.   And I don't think that simply telling people they are ignorant and need to get over it helps a thing (as has been implied in this thread).  That actually feeds the problem, istm.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 08:50:46
I agree with your first statement that Protestantism today is in as pitiful condition as Romanism is, and that is the way it was prophesied to be.

First, let's get our teminology right.  I am not a Roman.  I am a Catholic.  Did you know that not all Catholics are "Roman" Catholics?  As a matter of fact, the word "Roman" was not used until the Reformation.

You might want to research a little more.
Broach, you may find this is habit.  I also sometimes use the term, but that's not a slight.  It's because I live in a very Catholic community (40%) and even the buildings around here say Roman Catholic Church and RCC is a common abbreviation among them.  So please excuse me if the habit wins over my memory of your hangup on this point. ::tippinghat::

jmg,
I appreciate your comments.  I know that this is a common term and it is acceptable at times.  In past discussions, both on-line and in person, many have used the word as a derogatory term.  I do think that "Romanism" is a little overboard though and I wanted to bring it to Circuit's attention.

Again, I appreciate your comments and they are most certainly welcomed.

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: DCR on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 09:05:51
Don't native Americans do just that?  And don't many on this forum do just that with regard to RM churches?

Yes.  And, I suppose that's why I'm more sympathetic when it happens to someone else.

It just seems to me that claiming it's unfair for people to bring up real history is a bit unfair itself.
 

It's certainly not unfair to bring up history.  Yet, it often depends on the motive or agenda in bringing it up.  Historical evidence of what our forebears may have done is often used against us.  And, worse yet, the same evidence or facts can be used as fodder for various conspiracy theories... and there are some wacky ones out there, regarding the Catholic Church as well as other things... some of which have even been promoted on this forum.

And, it's a bit pie in the sky to think that everyone will read that history the same way.  Better, istm, to deal with it head on than to ask people to ignore it (which is what it sometimes seems some here are asking people to do).

I'm certainly not asking anyone to do this.

"It is a mistake to think that the past is dead. Nothing that has ever happened is quite without influence at this moment. The present is merely the past rolled up and concentrated in this second of time. You, too, are your past; often your face is your autobiography; you are what you are because of what you have been; because of your heredity stretching back into forgotten generations; because of every element of environment that has affected you, every man or woman that has met you, every book that you have read, every experience that you have had; all these are accumulated in your memory, your body, your character, your soul. So with a city, a country, and a race; it is its past, and cannot be understood without it." W. Durant

And, that's a good quote... a lot of truth in it.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying that one acts as though the past is the present and the attitudes behind the actions of the past are still present.  What I'm saying is, you've got to understand why people trip over this.   And I don't think that simply telling people they are ignorant and need to get over it helps a thing (as has been implied in this thread).  That actually feeds the problem, istm.

I agree.  We just need to be responsible and prudent with information and theories about others' motives or what an "institution" is up to, especially when attempting to indict wrongs.

OK... now, I'm rambling.  Thanks for the thoughts. 
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 09:46:04
I do think that "Romanism" is a little overboard though and I wanted to bring it to Circuit's attention.
That's probably the same as when I hear "Campbellite", huh?  ::smile::
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 10:48:48
We Protestants have no business removing the speck in Catholicism's eye while there's a Redwood stuck in ours!

The Pope doesn't "pretend to be God," he believes he is the Vicar of Christ on earth, the chief Pastor of  the Church. And no, the Catholic Church is NOT pagan in origin.

I'm all for voicing objections to views of other denominations one believes are wrong, but they should be legitimate objections to legimitate teachings, not caricatures of what that other denomination teaches. Anyone can google a few online documents or leaf through a few books and tracts by a denomination and "prove" they're apostate. And finding polemic works is easy!


After someone has carefully studied a faith tradition such as Catholicism, then they are in a position to object all they like, but not until they really have a good idea of what they're objecting to.

Pax.
Having met the criteria you deemed necessary to comment, I should be free to do so.

I agree with your first statement that Protestantism today is in as pitiful condition as Romanism is, and that is the way it was prophesied to be.

I also agree with your second statement, except that the word Vicar actually means “in the place of or substitute
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Lee Freeman on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 11:30:27
Lee,

You comment about familiarity with the Catholics and their history brings up a question for me, independent of others' comments and views.  Suppose one does read quite a bit of history, does even read the current catechism, etc. and maybe even is ex-Catholic, and still holds beliefs that it has born fruit that seems opposed to the very gospel itself?  Will the bar of what one can examine and criticize then move to some other spot? 

Certainly there are things said that are unfair, and based on hearsay.  That should be dismissed outright.  But what about when one looks at the very real history of the burning of heretics, the manipulation of governments, the oppressive tax collecting of the middle ages, and on and on?  Sure revisionists have tried to erase their import, but this is confirmed world history 101, and these are not the sort of things that one simply nonchalantly brushes aside.  The Reformers sure didn't, and many of them were Catholics until they could stomach the fruit no more.

Now, to be fair, because that is what they once did doesn't mean that is what they currently are doing, or would ever do again, but if history teaches us anything, it is that we ignore the brutalities of history at our own peril and naiveté.

Hey I'm fine with critiquing history. All I'm asking is for people to understand what they're disagreeing with before they start slamming it. Too often I hear my Protestant brethren making wildly inaccurate statements regarding Catholicism which are usually based on simple ignorance of what Catholicism really teaches.

As for the medeival Church, there is lots of mis-information, based upon generalizations and stereotypes, out there in the popular imagination. As a medievalist, I'm not convinced the medieval Church was as bad as popular history says. No, Catholicism doesn't have a spotless track-record, however a lot of the negative things said about the medieval Church are merely later Protestant propaganda. There was as much manipulation of the Church by corrupt monarchs-such as French King Philip the IV, who moved the papacy to Avignon so he could manipulate and ride herd on Popes Boniface VIII and Clement V, and who suppressed the Order of the Knights Templar on false charges in order to confiscate their wealth, as there was manipulation of monarchs by the Church. Earlier this year I posted an article here on the medieval church and heresy.

I guess all I'm asking for is a little balance.

Pax.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 12:22:50
That's actually the section of history I've been reading lately, from a few different sources.  Some of information (or perhaps misinformation in some cases) is not to be laid only at the feet of Catholic critics (Protestants, et al.) though, as there are quite a few more "secular" historians who do quite a number as well.  Catholic apologists are quick to distance the Catholic church from the execution of John Huss.  Secular sources say he was condemned at the Counsel of Constance because of his Wycliffian teachings, etc. and that the counsel had him burned at the stake to prove their own orthodoxy.  Apologists say it was really just the civil authorities that executed him.  Pope JP II said the church made a mistake in having him executed...which sounds like an admission that it wasn't really just the civil authorities behind his death, at least to me.

I share that example to simply say that our problem with history is that at this distance, it's hard to be very trustworthy of either side's accounting.  Personally, it leaves me often ::shrug:: ::headscratch::.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: da525382 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 12:32:01
Lee,

You comment about familiarity with the Catholics and their history brings up a question for me, independent of others' comments and views.  Suppose one does read quite a bit of history, does even read the current catechism, etc. and maybe even is ex-Catholic, and still holds beliefs that it has born fruit that seems opposed to the very gospel itself?  Will the bar of what one can examine and criticize then move to some other spot? 

Certainly there are things said that are unfair, and based on hearsay.  That should be dismissed outright.  But what about when one looks at the very real history of the burning of heretics, the manipulation of governments, the oppressive tax collecting of the middle ages, and on and on?  Sure revisionists have tried to erase their import, but this is confirmed world history 101, and these are not the sort of things that one simply nonchalantly brushes aside.  The Reformers sure didn't, and many of them were Catholics until they could stomach the fruit no more.

Now, to be fair, because that is what they once did doesn't mean that is what they currently are doing, or would ever do again, but if history teaches us anything, it is that we ignore the brutalities of history at our own peril and naiveté.

Hey I'm fine with critiquing history. All I'm asking is for people to understand what they're disagreeing with before they start slamming it. Too often I hear my Protestant brethren making wildly inaccurate statements regarding Catholicism which are usually based on simple ignorance of what Catholicism really teaches.

As for the medeival Church, there is lots of mis-information, based upon generalizations and stereotypes, out there in the popular imagination. As a medievalist, I'm not convinced the medieval Church was as bad as popular history says. No, Catholicism doesn't have a spotless track-record, however a lot of the negative things said about the medieval Church are merely later Protestant propaganda. There was as much manipulation of the Church by corrupt monarchs-such as French King Philip the IV, who moved the papacy to Avignon so he could manipulate and ride herd on Popes Boniface VIII and Clement V, and who suppressed the Order of the Knights Templar on false charges in order to confiscate their wealth, as there was manipulation of monarchs by the Church. Earlier this year I posted an article here on the medieval church and heresy.

I guess all I'm asking for is a little balance.

Pax.


Lee,

Do you have any recommended historical references to place RC history in a more balanced perspective?  I simply do not consider their own laudered historical account of themselves credible and would never therefore rely on they themselves to declare the "real" history of the RC church.  The problem, it seems to me, is that for 1600 years, for the most part, the people were illiterate and opposition was easily snuffed out either by torture or death, so their own history is really an account of a cover-up of an endless series of purges, not only of themselves, but of Judaic believers and other groups.  We therefore really don't know what the opposition said, how many were persuaded or could have been persuaded by opposing thought.  What it gets down to today is that phrase, "the history of the Catholic church"....it depends on who is summarizing that history and on what factual basis it is predicated.  

Lee, it also seems to me that the reformers would have been murdered in a heart-beat had it not been for the overwhelming numbers of followers they received, and perhaps literacy was growing, and of course, the printing press.   The age of cover-up and purges had to give way to enlightenment, it seems.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Dennis on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 12:58:26
Lee,

You comment about familiarity with the Catholics and their history brings up a question for me, independent of others' comments and views.  Suppose one does read quite a bit of history, does even read the current catechism, etc. and maybe even is ex-Catholic, and still holds beliefs that it has born fruit that seems opposed to the very gospel itself?  Will the bar of what one can examine and criticize then move to some other spot? 

Certainly there are things said that are unfair, and based on hearsay.  That should be dismissed outright.  But what about when one looks at the very real history of the burning of heretics, the manipulation of governments, the oppressive tax collecting of the middle ages, and on and on?  Sure revisionists have tried to erase their import, but this is confirmed world history 101, and these are not the sort of things that one simply nonchalantly brushes aside.  The Reformers sure didn't, and many of them were Catholics until they could stomach the fruit no more.

Now, to be fair, because that is what they once did doesn't mean that is what they currently are doing, or would ever do again, but if history teaches us anything, it is that we ignore the brutalities of history at our own peril and naiveté.

Hey I'm fine with critiquing history. All I'm asking is for people to understand what they're disagreeing with before they start slamming it. Too often I hear my Protestant brethren making wildly inaccurate statements regarding Catholicism which are usually based on simple ignorance of what Catholicism really teaches.

As for the medeival Church, there is lots of mis-information, based upon generalizations and stereotypes, out there in the popular imagination. As a medievalist, I'm not convinced the medieval Church was as bad as popular history says. No, Catholicism doesn't have a spotless track-record, however a lot of the negative things said about the medieval Church are merely later Protestant propaganda. There was as much manipulation of the Church by corrupt monarchs-such as French King Philip the IV, who moved the papacy to Avignon so he could manipulate and ride herd on Popes Boniface VIII and Clement V, and who suppressed the Order of the Knights Templar on false charges in order to confiscate their wealth, as there was manipulation of monarchs by the Church. Earlier this year I posted an article here on the medieval church and heresy.

I guess all I'm asking for is a little balance.

Pax.

I am not sure what you mean by "balanced."  If you mean even steven, then history may not be "balanced."  I would hope we all would be more concerned about getting it right than being "balanced." I readily admit that "getting it right" means recognizing there are two side to most stories and considering both sides of the story.

Having said the above, I am not sure history proves or disproves as much as either side would suggest.  At the very least, I hope that most would agree that the reformation was a reaction by fallible men to the condition of the Church as it existed at the time and that the very fallible men who ran the Church at that time must bear some responsibility for its condition.

Personally, I am convinced that God rewards those who diligently seek him. [Heb 11:6] I understand that to be a personal responsibility. I endeavor to be a diligent seeker and I operate under the assumption that those with whom I discuss these matters are diligent seekers. Thus, while we can discuss issues and perhaps even passionately debate them.  We should try to treat one another with the respect due to one for whom Christ died.  Hopefully, therefore, when I say something critical of either side it will be understood in that spirit.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Dennis on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 13:13:22
That's actually the section of history I've been reading lately, from a few different sources.  Some of information (or perhaps misinformation in some cases) is not to be laid only at the feet of Catholic critics (Protestants, et al.) though, as there are quite a few more "secular" historians who do quite a number as well.  Catholic apologists are quick to distance the Catholic church from the execution of John Huss.  Secular sources say he was condemned at the Counsel of Constance because of his Wycliffian teachings, etc. and that the counsel had him burned at the stake to prove their own orthodoxy.  Apologists say it was really just the civil authorities that executed him.  Pope JP II said the church made a mistake in having him executed...which sounds like an admission that it wasn't really just the civil authorities behind his death, at least to me.

I share that example to simply say that our problem with history is that at this distance, it's hard to be very trustworthy of either side's accounting.  Personally, it leaves me often ::shrug:: ::headscratch::.
At least in England, without going into all of technical legal rules of procedure which I am not sure I know, all executions were conducted by the secular authorities.  So when the Church decided someone must go, the condemned was handed over to the civil authorities.  Occasionally conflicts arose between the Church authorities and the crown as to whether a capital offense had been committed.  But in any event, the fact the actual execution was performed by civil authorities is no more absolving than is the fact the Romans actually drove the nails for those of us whose sin led to Jesus' crucifixion.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 13:35:35
We Protestants have no business removing the speck in Catholicism's eye while there's a Redwood stuck in ours!

The Pope doesn't "pretend to be God," he believes he is the Vicar of Christ on earth, the chief Pastor of  the Church. And no, the Catholic Church is NOT pagan in origin.

I'm all for voicing objections to views of other denominations one believes are wrong, but they should be legitimate objections to legimitate teachings, not caricatures of what that other denomination teaches. Anyone can google a few online documents or leaf through a few books and tracts by a denomination and "prove" they're apostate. And finding polemic works is easy!


After someone has carefully studied a faith tradition such as Catholicism, then they are in a position to object all they like, but not until they really have a good idea of what they're objecting to.

Pax.
Having met the criteria you deemed necessary to comment, I should be free to do so.

I agree with your first statement that Protestantism today is in as pitiful condition as Romanism is, and that is the way it was prophesied to be.

I also agree with your second statement, except that the word Vicar actually means “in the place of or substitute
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 15:15:36
Vatican II affirmed Trent.

CRP


Circuit, it does my heart good that you have read all of the documents that were issued during Vatican II.  Could you please explain them to me?
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 15:29:51
Vatican II affirmed Trent.

CRP


Circuit, it does my heart good that you have read all of the documents that were issued during Vatican II.  Could you please explain them to me?

I am not really interested in discussing whether the mass should be done in latin or not, but suffice to say this should do it for you.

 “Over against both tendencies, before all else, it must be stated that Vatican II is upheld by the same authority as Vatican I and the Council of Trent, namely, the Pope and the College of Bishops in communion with him, and that also with regard to its contents, Vatican II is in the strictest continuity with both previous councils and incorporates their texts word for word in decisive points.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mllevaleur on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 15:32:23
Quote
And, it's a bit pie in the sky to think that everyone will read that history the same way.  Better, istm, to deal with it head on than to ask people to ignore it (which is what it sometimes seems some here are asking people to do).

Honestly...I haven't seen many Catholics here who say, "Oh ignore all that...just trust me, it's not what you think." I've seen plenty who have spent time and energy trying to put historical quotes that have been conveniently plucked out, back into their historical context. I've seen attempts to explain our POV on certain events, not to excuse them, but again to put them back in a proper context. I've seen exaggerations be challenged, and I've even seen admissions that the Church does indeed have blemishes in her past that should not be ignored or swept under the rug.

From the other side, I've seen faux history being presented, attempts at correcting it ignored on the grounds that anything coming from a Catholic concerning history can't be trusted and must be untrue, venom spewed in return to attempts at explanation, insults, etc. (Alongside plenty of other non-Catholics who tried to minimize that and stop any unfairness, which I greatly appreciate!  ::tippinghat:: )

So...I guess I haven't seen many Catholics here, or non-Catholics of the non-anti-Catholic variety, saying "ignore that." And you know what...that's kind of what I found of (knowledgeable) Catholics in general when I first started actually looking at history for myself and not getting it from anti-Catholic sources alone. Now, with my anti-Catholic ears prior to that, if I heard someone putting it back in historical context I immediately thought, "Ugh...trying to justify those atrocities and ignore history." But, when I actually looked at what they were saying and considered it, I found, to my surprise, I was the one ignoring stuff. What they were saying could largely be backed up with secular history sources.

That's actually the section of history I've been reading lately, from a few different sources.  Some of information (or perhaps misinformation in some cases) is not to be laid only at the feet of Catholic critics (Protestants, et al.) though, as there are quite a few more "secular" historians who do quite a number as well.  Catholic apologists are quick to distance the Catholic church from the execution of John Huss.  Secular sources say he was condemned at the Counsel of Constance because of his Wycliffian teachings, etc. and that the counsel had him burned at the stake to prove their own orthodoxy.  Apologists say it was really just the civil authorities that executed him.  Pope JP II said the church made a mistake in having him executed...which sounds like an admission that it wasn't really just the civil authorities behind his death, at least to me.

I share that example to simply say that our problem with history is that at this distance, it's hard to be very trustworthy of either side's accounting.  Personally, it leaves me often ::shrug:: ::headscratch::.

I can understand that, but I think the best thing is to read both sides, try to find unbiased sources whenever possible, read those too, and see which makes the most sense, and fits the most facts. I really do believe it's possible to gather enough reliable evidence to support one side or another, or see if they can fit together, and to just use the old noggin and think critically about this stuff with the available info.

For instance, your example...I've not studied it in depth and don't remember many details, but going purely on what you said it sounds to me like the secular side is acknowledging the close ties Church and State had at the time (which they did...which MOST Churches and states did as a given), while the apologists are trying to put something that sounds shocking to our modern ears (we who hold up the separation of Church and State as a fundamental principal) back into context, to remind people that it wasn't just the Catholics that were tied up with the state, that's just how stuff was done back then! And then JPII is saying, regardless of what was commonly done at the time, we now realize executing people (whether it's the state or church that does it) for heresy is not a good thing, and we apologize for the part we played in it in this specific case, and others. (Cue all the other groups who did the same thing for their own apology...) That apology is NOT admitting the often-held idea that it was just the Catholic Church doing that kind of thing, nor is that what most (fair and unbiased) secular sources are saying (they're usually just reporting the facts), and that is all that most of the apologists are trying to point out, that it was a human problem and not a uniquely Catholic one. So...they kind of all fit together, you just have to see what it is each one is trying to say, and what angle they're coming from.  

The biggest problem, in my experience, occurs when people have strong internal bias, and don't want to believe certain things, and do want to believe other certain things to justify their bias. (And that, of course, can happen on either side.) What happens then is talking past each other...one side assumes they know what they other side is saying, and they don't actually listen. The respond with some non sequitor because they didn't listen, and they don't think they need to listen because they already know.

For instance, for specifically anti-Catholic bias, people point fingers at the violence and such of times past, and often blame it on the Catholic Church, because conveniently there were no protestants around to blame it on! But the problem was not a specifically Catholic one...it was usually a HUMAN one. Look at the times and culture of the crusades and inquisition, and you'll find, not a largely peaceful society with a mean awful Catholic hierarchy trying to cause trouble in its midst, but a generally often violent society, with contemporary human beings who lived in that society and were used to it who happen to also be Catholic.  Was there corruption in the Church? Yes! Just like there was corruption in any organization of the day. Were bad things done in the name of religion? Yes! Just like bad things were done in the name of the king, or society, or family, or any other human organization.

Now, the problem is plenty of things have been exaggerated, taken out of context, misunderstood, blame has been misapplied, and so on and so forth, and it's often hard and exhausting to have to wade through all of that to get to the factual truth, and then begin to put it back in historical context. Again, that's not to justify any wrong that was done, but to more accurately be able to see what wrong was actually done and why, and to consider the surrounding culture. Now, try doing this with someone who wants to believe the worst and who wants to blame the Catholics for everything, and they will typically stop listening before they start and assume you're just trying to excuse/justify/ignore history, then accuse you of such for trying to explain without having taken the time to consider what you said at all, because they "already know" you're just going to deny any wrongdoing on behalf of the Catholic Church...because that's what Catholics do.

It's a vicious circle.

It's really quite frustrating, especially when you have to start from scratch with each new person who brings out the same old arguments based on exaggerations and faux history.

Anyway...don't know where I'm going with all that, lol, I'll just stop there!
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mllevaleur on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 15:36:31
Vatican II affirmed Trent.

CRP


Circuit, it does my heart good that you have read all of the documents that were issued during Vatican II.  Could you please explain them to me?

I am not really interested in discussing whether the mass should be done in latin or not, but suffice to say this should do it for you.

 “Over against both tendencies, before all else, it must be stated that Vatican II is upheld by the same authority as Vatican I and the Council of Trent, namely, the Pope and the College of Bishops in communion with him, and that also with regard to its contents, Vatican II is in the strictest continuity with both previous councils and incorporates their texts word for word in decisive points.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mllevaleur on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 16:11:50
Quote
The origin of the Roman church is a syncretistic marriage between the church and the world, facilitated by Constantine.


Although I disagree with the "origin" of the Church comment, I do agree that Constantine helped to bring people to Christ often through using what they were already familiar with.

See, we Catholics believe in an Incarnational Christianity. God became Flesh, and in the same way we believe it's a GOOD thing to unite Spiritual and Physical. Physical things can help us relate to and better understand Spiritual things. We are not gnostics who think matter is evil and to be avoided.

Your quote above reminded me of something I read recently and posted about (http://laviecatholique.blogspot.com/2007/12/reclaiming-christmas.html) on my blog. I was actually talking about celebrating Christmas, and how we didn't consider it a religious holiday growing up, but it relates here as well.

I'm reminded of a blog post from Mark Shea I read a while back about Harry Potter and Pharisees. (Yeah, I know...go with me here!) He describes how the Pharisees are so focused on remaining clean by remaining separated from all "unclean things", that they completely miss the lesson when Jesus comes. The laws from God that were supposed to humble them and teach them that there was no way, through their own power, they could be sanctified, to prepare them for the idea that Jesus alone has the power to sanctify, were kind of twisted around. They set up so many rules to try and keep themselves clean (which was a noble idea) that they ended up convincing themselves they didn't need any cleansing.

And so in an ironic way, they take the mirror of ritual uncleanness that God has given them in the Mosaic Law, and instead of seeing in it an image of their own uncleanness and defilement by sin, the turn it around and say to those around them, "See how unclean you are!"

Naturally then, when Jesus appears on the scene, they simply do not know what to do with him and are motivated by their pride to misunderstand him. Jesus, in Matthew 8, turns the Pharisaic understanding of the law on its head. He touches lepers and they are healed (8:1 4), receives Gentiles and they receive faith (8:5-13), consorts with demon-possessed people in a cemetery and they are restored (8:28-31), and, in the next chapter, permits the touch of a menstruating woman and she's healed (9:18-22), touches the dead and she is raised (9:25), and eats with tax collectors and sinners and makes them saints (9:9-13). Yet, in all this, they see only the ritual defilement, not the revolutionary reversal in the flow of power. For, as Jesus points out elsewhere, pride has blinded them (John 9:35-41). They are so certain they are clean they cannot say, "Lord, if you're willing, you can make me clean." And so they miss the crucial lesson that the time for separation is past. In Israel's childhood, separation from uncleanness and sin was necessary just as it is necessary for us to keep our children from "bad influences" lest they become imitators. But with the dawn of the power of the Kingdom of Heaven, it is the bad influences that are to be conquered with good ones, sin that is to be conquered with virtue, and death that is to be conquered with life.

So what does this have to do with Harry Potter?
[And Worldly Christmas?]

Well, the funny thing about the gospel is how often, in the history of the Church, the Church has fulfilled Jesus promise, "if they drink any deadly thing, it will not harm them" (Mark 16:18). The Church has drunk from all sorts of pagan wells, ranging from Plato and Aristotle, to the various ways in which Norse, German, Druidic, Roman, Indian, and other forms of pagan culture have been baptised and turned to the service of Christ. The Pharisaic approach is to reject--as the Pharisees rejected Christ--the possibility that he really holds power over the devil. It is a mentality that never considers the opposite possibility: namely, that Christ has power to conquer what defiled us under the old law and turn it to his glory.

So, we see what Constantine did as turning human constructs to Christ's glory, using what people knew to introduce them to Christ. We don't see this as "tainting" Christianity, but rather the other way around...as sanctifying worldly things to be used for the glory of God, the way that Jesus came and was not defiled by lepors and sinners the way the Pharisees assumed he would be, but rather there was a complete reversal of power there, and Christ, instead, cleansed them rather than being made unclean himself.

I highly recommend this three part series on Pharisees and purity, it really made a lot of things "click" for me mentally, especially having grown up in the CoC where the mentality is often similar to the one described.

Part 1: Pharisaic Purity (http://ncregister.com/site/article/7343)
Part 2: A Christian Approach to Purity (http://ncregister.com/site/article/7398)
Part 3: Sterility and Fruitfulness (http://ncregister.com/site/article/7463)
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 17:10:40
I am not really interested in discussing whether the mass should be done in latin or not, but suffice to say this should do it for you.


Circuit, you just confirmed what I thought.  If you think that this is the only issue that was discussed during Vatican II, you are as clueless as I thought you were.  Read the documents, then we can have a discussion on what Vatican II was all about.  You can find them on the Vatican website.  They are not secretive or anything. 

And as Mllevaleur pointed out, (glad to see you Mllevaleur), it did affirm the teachings of previous councils...the Church is pretty consistent when it comes to doctrine...has been for 2000 years.

Here is the link to those documents....

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm

You may actually learn a thing or two...
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 17:37:23
And as Mllevaleur pointed out, (glad to see you Mllevaleur), it did affirm the teachings of previous councils...the Church is pretty consistent when it comes to doctrine...has been for 2000 years.
I know that, and you know that, but at least now we have a couple of admissions of this for Lee Freeman.

Make no mistake about it, as Rome was, Rome is.

One of the biggest problems is that they don't allow you to actually have salvation, they refer to assurance of sins forgiven as the sin of presumption. If someone is not even allowed to know for certain that they are saved, how are they going to show anyone else how to have eternal life? Wouldn't that make them a blind guide?


CRP
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 17:44:55
Quote
And, it's a bit pie in the sky to think that everyone will read that history the same way.  Better, istm, to deal with it head on than to ask people to ignore it (which is what it sometimes seems some here are asking people to do).

Honestly...I haven't seen many Catholics here who say, "Oh ignore all that...just trust me, it's not what you think."
No, it really hasn't been Catholics, but over the last few years there have been some who have when the subject's come up.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 18:08:27
One of the biggest problems is that they don't allow you to actually have salvation, they refer to assurance of sins forgiven as the sin of presumption. If someone is not even allowed to know for certain that they are saved, how are they going to show anyone else how to have eternal life? Wouldn't that make them a blind guide?


CRP


What would give you this notion?  Circuit, I could spend hours talking to you.  However, I think alot of this stuff is just over your head a little.

I have salvation.  I will put it like this.  What would my response be, like any other Catholic, if I am asked the magic question--Are you saved?  My response would be...

"As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."

Sounds pretty biblical to me...Amen...

Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 18:59:45
Again, it wopuld do all good to check out amazing statements from the Roman Catholic Church...


http://www.lightministries.com/id524.htm#laws_1


It is amazing...The Roman Church thinks it's above the scriptures...everything...

What a body of scriptural perversion.

Robet G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Nevertheless on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 21:18:04
It also amazes me that even though the theology of Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity is almost identical, it is Catholicism that recieves much of the attack.

Catholicism is much more in the public eye than Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Tue Dec 18, 2007 - 22:23:57
One of the biggest problems is that they don't allow you to actually have salvation, they refer to assurance of sins forgiven as the sin of presumption. If someone is not even allowed to know for certain that they are saved, how are they going to show anyone else how to have eternal life? Wouldn't that make them a blind guide?


CRP


What would give you this notion?  Circuit, I could spend hours talking to you.  However, I think alot of this stuff is just over your head a little.

I have salvation.  I will put it like this.  What would my response be, like any other Catholic, if I am asked the magic question--Are you saved?  My response would be...

"As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."

Sounds pretty biblical to me...Amen...



Your answer is just a smokescreen that I have heard a hundred times before. A little more digging gets to the heart of the matter.

1) Do you presently HAVE everlasting life? Yes or No
2) If you have something that is everlasting, can it end? Yes or No
3) If you died right now, where would you spend eternity? Heaven, Hell, or other.


CRP
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 06:16:00
Your answer is just a smokescreen that I have heard a hundred times before. A little more digging gets to the heart of the matter.

1) Do you presently HAVE everlasting life? Yes or No
2) If you have something that is everlasting, can it end? Yes or No
3) If you died right now, where would you spend eternity? Heaven, Hell, or other.


CRP

Circuit, if you have a problem with what Scripture says, then I am definitely not the person you should be talking to...
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 07:11:38
Your answer is just a smokescreen that I have heard a hundred times before. A little more digging gets to the heart of the matter.

1) Do you presently HAVE everlasting life? Yes or No
2) If you have something that is everlasting, can it end? Yes or No
3) If you died right now, where would you spend eternity? Heaven, Hell, or other.


CRP

Circuit, if you have a problem with what Scripture says, then I am definitely not the person you should be talking to...
If you are actually saved, you should easily be able to answer the questions. Remember, you could be just one heartbeat away from eternity.

CRP
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Jimbob on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 07:20:11
Ahem....

Quote
1.5 You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian if he or she genuinely believes in Jesus Christ as the savior of human beings from hell and claims to have demonstrable faith in Him.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: broach972 on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 07:37:16
Your answer is just a smokescreen that I have heard a hundred times before. A little more digging gets to the heart of the matter.

1) Do you presently HAVE everlasting life? Yes or No
2) If you have something that is everlasting, can it end? Yes or No
3) If you died right now, where would you spend eternity? Heaven, Hell, or other.


CRP

Circuit, if you have a problem with what Scripture says, then I am definitely not the person you should be talking to...
If you are actually saved, you should easily be able to answer the questions. Remember, you could be just one heartbeat away from eternity.

CRP

Circuit, I answered these questions in a previous post.  My answer was pretty much to the point.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 07:54:26
Ahem....

Quote
1.5 You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian if he or she genuinely believes in Jesus Christ as the savior of human beings from hell and claims to have demonstrable faith in Him.

I am not telling nor implying, I am merely asking to see if he has demonstrable faith in Christ. If a person has demonstrable faith in Christ, those are pretty easy questions to answer.

CRP
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 07:56:14
Your answer is just a smokescreen that I have heard a hundred times before. A little more digging gets to the heart of the matter.

1) Do you presently HAVE everlasting life? Yes or No
2) If you have something that is everlasting, can it end? Yes or No
3) If you died right now, where would you spend eternity? Heaven, Hell, or other.


CRP

Circuit, if you have a problem with what Scripture says, then I am definitely not the person you should be talking to...
If you are actually saved, you should easily be able to answer the questions. Remember, you could be just one heartbeat away from eternity.

CRP

Circuit, I answered these questions in a previous post.  My answer was pretty much to the point.
Three words is all I am looking for.

CRP
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 08:00:31
Number two is a leading question the way I read it.  I would imagine the other two may seem to be leading questions to others.

Recognize differences in people's perspective rather than assuming they conform to yours, and you may be able to better understand their answers.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: Circuitridingpreacher on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 08:08:25
Number two is a leading question the way I read it.  I would imagine the other two may seem to be leading questions to others.

Recognize differences in people's perspective rather than assuming they conform to yours, and you may be able to better understand their answers.

Of course it is leading, since God only gave us two choices I am trying to make it as obvious as I can.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

1 John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

CRP
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: marc on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 08:15:51
Number two is a leading question the way I read it.  I would imagine the other two may seem to be leading questions to others.

Recognize differences in people's perspective rather than assuming they conform to yours, and you may be able to better understand their answers.

Of course it is leading, since God only gave us two choices I am trying to make it as obvious as I can.



News Flash:  You Ain't God, so you may want to try to be a little more flexible.

Unless, of course, you're claiming Special Revelation.  If not, the rest of us also know how to read, thank you.

(btw, have you ever heard of anyone choosing to walk away from a lifetime contract?)
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 17:26:02
Unless, of course, you're claiming Special Revelation.  If not, the rest of us also know how to read, thank you.

Just a reminder...

Anytime someone claims, "God showed me", or something like that, they are claiming direct inspiration, and are putting themselves on a level with Paul, and other Biblical writers.  And as such, their thoughts are on a par with scripture (or so they think, even if they don't admit).

I'd love to witness an argument between two who both believe "God told them"...

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: charlie on Wed Dec 19, 2007 - 20:00:55
I'd love to witness an argument between two who both believe "God told them"...

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Robert G

Just about like witnessing an argument between two people who both claim to have read the bible and studied for themselves.

Sometimes it's a hoot. Sometimes it's just plain nasty.
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: mistergus on Thu Dec 20, 2007 - 17:32:02
I'd love to witness an argument between two who both believe "God told them"...

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Robert G

Just about like witnessing an argument between two people who both claim to have read the bible and studied for themselves.

Sometimes it's a hoot. Sometimes it's just plain nasty.

But it's at least a result of study.

Better than pure emotionalism.

Robert G
Title: Re: The Roman Catholic Church Will Suppress Religious Freedom
Post by: charlie on Fri Dec 21, 2007 - 06:38:51
I'd love to witness an argument between two who both believe "God told them"...

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Robert G

Just about like witnessing an argument between two people who both claim to have read the bible and studied for themselves.

Sometimes it's a hoot. Sometimes it's just plain nasty.

But it's at least a result of study.

Better than pure emotionalism.

Robert G
I agree with you in theory. However, in reality, most people who feel that God told them a little secret tend not to bind their new knowledge on others, but rather simply to share it, while people who feel they have studied a thing through are willing to burn others at the stake who have come to different conclusions.