- This topic is empty.
- Posts
I would like to start with a man called Giordano Bruno who was burned at the stake for suggesting that the sun as just one of an infinite number of independently moving heavenly bodies: he is the first man to have conceptualized the universe as a continuum where the stars we see at night are of identical nature as the sun. He was burned at the stake by authorities in 1600 after the Roman Inquisition found him guilty of heresy.
Some of the charges against him include:
- Holding opinions contrary to the Catholic Faith and speaking against it and its ministers.
- Holding erroneous opinions about the Trinity, about Christ's divinity and Incarnation.
- Claiming the existence of a plurality of worlds and their eternity.
I do not know that case but I know of other cases when supposedly devout Roman Catholics ignored the Pope and persecuted who they chose.
T8………Check out Michale Servetus. Burned to death by the Protestant John Calvin with the consent of the Catholic Church also. For the article he wrote on the ERRORS OF THE TRINITY. Get the book OUT OF THE FLAMES and it has a word for word account of his trial and execution. The Catholic Church has a huge history of blood shed of true Saints of GOD. When they try to deny it they are simply LAIRS and deluded in their minds. But thanks be to GOD their Time is Short and Near the END. IMO
gene
I found this post by chance from another forum.
No supported facts and is very general. But puts it in a way that is simple and maybe even true. Who knows?
Quote The Catholic Church was instituted, in the beginning, as a migration strategy for the Roman Empire, which could no longer afford to exist in its original form. As The Church, it no longer needed the big, expensive army, since it had excommunication as the Holy WMD against any King or Emperor in the Christian world. This is why it converted communities by force, one little area at a time, and installed Bishops and Cardinals everywhere. They hijacked the Christian faith, and turned it into a 1,000 year extension for the Roman Empire. All it took was to rename the Emperor as Pope, and buy him a new hat. Same governing structure as the Roman Empire, and it was even called The Holy Roman Empire for a while, before being slowly rebranded as The Church, and then The Roman Catholic Church.
With it being a disguised incarnation of the Roman Empire, what would you expect from it as a religion? Diddling boys is probably the least malignant aspect of it. Hell, that is a direct result of the Church instituting celibacy in the priestly ranks, and that was instituted so that The Church would never lose any lands or wealth to the various national inheritance laws in Europe during the Middle Ages. No heirs = no inheritance. No inheritance, leaves all that stuff to The Church, and those Bishops and Cardinals made a lot of money, and got a lot of land, through the threat of excommunication back in those days.
It was like being in the mob.
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 02 2009,09:18) I found this post by chance from another forum. No supported facts and is very general. But puts it in a way that is simple and maybe even true. Who knows?
Quote The Catholic Church was instituted, in the beginning, as a migration strategy for the Roman Empire, which could no longer afford to exist in its original form. As The Church, it no longer needed the big, expensive army, since it had excommunication as the Holy WMD against any King or Emperor in the Christian world. This is why it converted communities by force, one little area at a time, and installed Bishops and Cardinals everywhere. They hijacked the Christian faith, and turned it into a 1,000 year extension for the Roman Empire. All it took was to rename the Emperor as Pope, and buy him a new hat. Same governing structure as the Roman Empire, and it was even called The Holy Roman Empire for a while, before being slowly rebranded as The Church, and then The Roman Catholic Church.
With it being a disguised incarnation of the Roman Empire, what would you expect from it as a religion? Diddling boys is probably the least malignant aspect of it. Hell, that is a direct result of the Church instituting celibacy in the priestly ranks, and that was instituted so that The Church would never lose any lands or wealth to the various national inheritance laws in Europe during the Middle Ages. No heirs = no inheritance. No inheritance, leaves all that stuff to The Church, and those Bishops and Cardinals made a lot of money, and got a lot of land, through the threat of excommunication back in those days.
It was like being in the mob.
It sounds rather biased. I am not even sure there is any proof to back what it states up. You also forgot to let us know the author or at least the forum.Sure there may be bias. But let face it, there was a Roman Empire which became a Holy Roman Empire and somewhere in all that, the RCC did came into being and I don't think that both existed at the same time. So I guess the guy just did some simple addition to circumstantial evidence.
Also, I don't think it matters where it is from as there is no supporting facts anyway. There is no authority being quoted. I also think men tend to judge by the outward appearance when you name a denomination or author anyway. So to not let bias take over, I tend to prefer that the words are judged by themselves without being tainted by who posted it.
Anyway in this case the person was basically anonymous and posted in a forum that is not specifically a Christian one, so I couldn't tell you who posted it even if I wanted to. The forum was called something like “Anything Goes”. IT wasn't called that, but something similar.
Taken from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_by_burningIn 1184, the Roman Catholic Synod of Verona legislated that burning was to be the official punishment for heresy, as Church policy was against the spilling of blood. It was also believed that the condemned would have no body to be resurrected in the Afterlife.[dubious ] This decree was later reaffirmed by the Fourth Council of the Lateran in 1215, the Synod of Toulouse in 1229, and numerous spiritual and secular leaders through the 17th century.
Civil authorities burnt persons judged to be heretics under the medieval Inquisition, including Giordano Bruno. Burning was also used by Protestants during the witch-hunts of Europe.
Among the best-known individuals to be executed by burning were Jacques de Molay (1314), Jan Hus (1415), St Joan of Arc (May 30, 1431), Savonarola(1498) Patrick Hamilton (1528), William Tyndale (1536), Michael Servetus (1553), Giordano Bruno (1600) and Avvakum (1682). Anglican martyrs Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley (both in 1555) and Thomas Cranmer (1556) were also burnt at the stake.
If there is any truth to the above, it looks like some Protestants were just as bad.
That would be Pope Lucius III who is probably responsible during his short time, some of it spent in exile in Verona.
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 02 2009,01:47) Quote (t8 @ Oct. 02 2009,09:18) I found this post by chance from another forum. No supported facts and is very general. But puts it in a way that is simple and maybe even true. Who knows?
Quote The Catholic Church was instituted, in the beginning, as a migration strategy for the Roman Empire, which could no longer afford to exist in its original form. As The Church, it no longer needed the big, expensive army, since it had excommunication as the Holy WMD against any King or Emperor in the Christian world. This is why it converted communities by force, one little area at a time, and installed Bishops and Cardinals everywhere. They hijacked the Christian faith, and turned it into a 1,000 year extension for the Roman Empire. All it took was to rename the Emperor as Pope, and buy him a new hat. Same governing structure as the Roman Empire, and it was even called The Holy Roman Empire for a while, before being slowly rebranded as The Church, and then The Roman Catholic Church.
With it being a disguised incarnation of the Roman Empire, what would you expect from it as a religion? Diddling boys is probably the least malignant aspect of it. Hell, that is a direct result of the Church instituting celibacy in the priestly ranks, and that was instituted so that The Church would never lose any lands or wealth to the various national inheritance laws in Europe during the Middle Ages. No heirs = no inheritance. No inheritance, leaves all that stuff to The Church, and those Bishops and Cardinals made a lot of money, and got a lot of land, through the threat of excommunication back in those days.
It was like being in the mob.
It sounds rather biased. I am not even sure there is any proof to back what it states up. You also forgot to let us know the author or at least the forum.
KerwinGood point!
Here is the source…
I think it is important to know the source.
For instance if you wanted information about the false teachings of the JWs, you wouldn't solely take the information that you read on a JW sight to gather your facts!
For sure you will only be getting their side and view!
WJ
CA wrote the following in another post as fruit for the Roman Catholic Church which he calls the Catholic Church.
Quote You want fruit. I don't think you're ready for what you're going to get. This thread might end up very long indeed. But here we go: ST. FULGENTIUS, Bishop.
IN spite of family troubles and delicate health, Fulgentius was appointed at an early age procurator of his province at Carthage. This success, however, did not satisfy his heart. Levying the taxes proved daily more distasteful, and when he was twenty-two, St. Austin's treatise on the Psalms decided him to enter religion. After six years of peace, his monastery was attacked by Arian heretics, and Fulgentius himself driven out destitute to the desert. He now sought the solitude of Egypt, but finding that country also in schism, he turned his steps to Rome. There the splendors of the imperial court only told him of the greater glory of the heavenly Jerusalem, and at the first lull in the persecution he resought his African cell. Elected bishop in 508, he was summoned forth to face new dangers, and was shortly after banished by the Arian king, Thrasimund, with fifty-nine orthodox prelates, to Sardinia. Though the youngest of the exiles, he was at once the mouthpiece of his brethren and the stay of their flocks. By his books and letters, which are still extant, he confounded both Pelagian and Arian heresiarchs, and confirmed the Catholics in Africa and Gaul. An Arian priest betrayed Fulgentius to the Numidians, and ordered him to be scourged. This was done. His hair and beard were plucked out, and he was left naked, his body one bleeding sore. Even the Arian bishop was ashamed of this brutality, and offered to punish the priest if the Saint would prosecute him. But Fulgentius replied, “A Christian must not seek revenge in this world. God knows how to right His servants’ wrongs. If I were to bring the punishment of man on that priest, I should lose my own reward with God. And it would be a scandal to many little ones that a Catholic and a monk, however unworthy he be, should seek redress from an Arian bishop.” On Thrasimund's death the bishops returned to their flocks, and Fulgentius, having reëstablished discipline in his see, retired to an island monastery, where after a year's preparation he died in peace in the year 533.
ST. MACARIUS OF ALEXANDRIA.
MACARIUS when a youth left his fruit-stall at Alexandria to join the great St. Antony. The patriarch, warned by a miracle of his disciple's sanctity, named him the heir of his virtues. His life was one long conflict with self. “I am tormenting my tormentor,” replied he to one who met him bent double with a basket of sand in the heat of the day. “Whenever I am slothful and idle, I am pestered by desires for distant travel.” When he was quite worn out he returned to his cell. Since sleep at times overpowered him, he kept watch for twenty days and nights; being about to faint, he entered his cell and slept, but henceforth slept only at will. A gnat stung him; he killed it. In revenge for this softness he remained naked in a marsh till his body was covered with noxious bites and he was recognized only by his voice. Once when thirsty he received a present of grapes, but passed them untouched to a hermit who was toiling in the heat. This one gave them to a third, who handed them to a fourth; thus the grapes went the round of the desert and returned to Macarius, who thanked God for his brethren's abstinence. Macarius saw demons assailing the hermits at prayer. They put their fingers into the mouths of some, and made them yawn. They closed the eyes of others, and walked upon them when asleep. They placed vain and sensual images before many of the brethren, and then mocked those who were captivated by them. None vanquished the devils effectually save those who by constant vigilance repelled them at once. Macarius visited one hermit daily for four months, but never could speak to him, as he was always in prayer; so he called him an ” angel on earth.” After being many years Superior, Macarius fled in disguise to St. Pachomius, to begin again as his novice; but St. Pachomius, instructed by a vision, bad, rim return to his brethren, who loved him as their father. In his old age, thinking nature tamed, he determined to spend five days alone in prayer. On the third day the cell seemed on fire, and Macarius came forth. God permitted this delusion, he said, lest he be ensnared by pride. At the age of seventy-three he was driven into exile and brutally outraged by the Arian heretics. He died A. D. 394.
Back to topST. GENEVIEVE, Virgin.
GENEVIEVE was born at Nanterre, near Paris. St. Germanus, when passing through, specially noticed a little shepherdess, and predicted her future sanctity. At seven years of age she made a vow of perpetual chastity. After the death of her parents, Paris became her abode; but she often travelled on works of mercy, which, by the gifts of prophecy and miracles, she unfailingly performed. At one time she was cruelly persecuted: her enemies, jealous of her power, called her a hypocrite and. tried to drown her; but St. Germanus having sent her some blessed bread as a token of esteem, the outcry ceased, and ever afterwards she was honored as a Saint. During the siege of Paris by Childeric, king of the Franks, Genevieve went out with a few followers and procured corn for the starving citizens. Nevertheless Childeric, though a pagan, respected her, and at her request spared the lives of many prisoners. By her exhortations again, when Attila and his Huns were approaching the city, the inhabitants, instead of taking flight, gave themselves to prayer and penance, and averted, as she had foretold, the impending scourge. Clovis, when converted from paganism by his holy wife, St. Clotilda, made Genevieve his constant adviser, and, in spite of his violent character, made a generous and Christian king. She died within a few weeks of that monarch, in 512, aged eighty-nine.
A pestilence broke out at Paris in 1129, which in a short time swept off fourteen thousand persons, and, in spite of all human efforts, daily added to its victims. At length, on November 26th, the shrine of St. Genevieve was carried in solemn procession through the city. That same day but three persons died, the rest recovered, and no others were taken ill. This was but the first of a series of miraculous favors which the city of Paris has obtained through the relics of its patron Saint.
ST. TITUS, Bishop.
TITUS was a convert from heathenism, a disciple of St. Paul, one of the chosen companions of the Apostles in his journey to the Council of Jerusalem, and his fellow-laborers in many apostolic missions. From the Second Epistle which St. Paul sent by the hand of Titus to the Corinthians we gain an insight into his character and understand the, strong affection which his master bore him. Titus had been commissioned to carry out a twofold office needing much firmness, discretion, and charity. He was to be the bearer of a severe rebuke to the Corinthians, who were giving scandal and were wavering in their faith; and at the same time he was to put their charity to a further test by calling upon them for abundant alms for the church at Jerusalem. St. Paul meanwhile was anxiously awaiting the result. At Troas he writes, “I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus, my brother.” He set sail to Macedonia. Here at last Titus brought the good news. His success had been complete. He reported the sorrow, the zeal, the generosity of the Christians, till the Apostle could not contain his joy, and sent back to them his faithful messenger with the letter of comfort from which we have quoted. Titus was finally left as a bishop in Crete, and here he, in turn, received the epistle which bears his name, and here at last he
died in peace.The mission of Titus to Corinth shows us how well the disciple caught the spirit of his master. He knew how to be firm and to inspire respect. The Corinthians, we are told, “received him with fear and trembling.” He was patient and painstaking. St. Paul “gave thanks to God, Who had put such carefulness for them in the heart of Titus.” And these gifts were enhanced by a quickness to detect and call out all that was good in others, and by a joyousness which overflowed upon the spirit of St. Paul himself, who “abundantly rejoiced in the joy of Titus.”
Back to topST. GREGORY, Bishop.
ST. GREGORY was one of the principal senators of Autun, and continued from the death of his wife a widower till the age of fifty-seven, et which time, for his singular virtues, he was consecrated Bishop of Langres, which see he governed with admirable prudence and zeal thirty-three years, sanctifying his pastoral labors by the most profound humility, assiduous prayer, and extraordinary abstinence and mortification. An incredible number of infidels were converted by him from idolatry, and worldly Christians from their disorders. He died about the beginning of the year 541, but some days after the Epiphany. Out of devotion to St. Benignus, he desired to be buried near that Saint's tomb at Dijon; this was executed by his virtuous son Tetricus, who succeeded him in his bishopric.
ST. SIMEON STYLITES.
ONE winter's day, about the year 401, the snow lay thick around Sisan, a little town in Cilicia. A shepherd boy, who could not lead his sheep to the fields on account of the cold, went to the church instead, and listened to the eight Beatitudes, which were read that morning. He asked how these blessings were to be obtained, and when he was told of the monastic life a thirst for perfection arose within him. He became the wonder of the world, the great St. Simeon Stylites. He was warned that perfection would cost him dear, and so it did. A mere child, he began the monastic life, and therein passed a dozen years in superhuman austerity. He bound a rope round his waist till the flesh was putrefied. He ate but once in seven days, and, when God led him to a solitary life, kept fasts of forty days. Thirty-seven years he spent on the top of pillars, exposed to heat and cold, day and night adoring the majesty of God. Perfection was all in all to St. Simeon; the means nothing, except in so far as God chose them for him. The solitaries of Egypt were suspicious of a life so new and so strange, and they sent one of their number to bid St. Simeon come down from his pillar and return to the common life. In a moment the Saint made ready to descend; but the Egyptian religious was satisfied with this proof of humility. “Stay,” he said, “and take courage; your way of life is from God.”
Cheerfulness, humility, and obedience set their seal upon the austerities of St. Simeon. The words which God put into his mouth brought crowds of heathens to baptism and of sinners to penance. At last, in the year 460, those who watched below noticed that he had been motionless three whole days. They ascended, and found the old man's body still bent in the attitude of prayer, but his soul was with God. Extraordinary as the life of St. Simeon may appear, it teaches us two plain and practical lessons: First, we must constantly renew within ourselves an intense desire for perfection. Secondly, we must use with fidelity and courage the means of perfection God points out.
ST. LUCIAN, Martyr.
ST. LUCIAN was born at Samosata in Syria. Having lost his parents in his youth, he distributed all his worldly goods, of which he inherited an abundant share, to the poor, and withdrew to Edessa, to live near a holy man named Macarius, who imbued his mind with a knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, and led him to the practice of the Christian virtues. Having become a priest, his time was divided between the external duties of his holy state, the performance of works of charity, and the study of sacred literature. He revised the books of the Old and New Testaments, expunging the errors which had found their way into the text either through the negligence of copyists or the malice of heretics, thus preparing the way for St. Jerome, who shortly after was to give to the world the Latin translation known as “The Vulgate.” Having been denounced as a Christian, Lucian was thrown into prison and condemned to the torture, which was protracted for twelve whole days. Some Christian visited him in prison, on the feast of the Epiphany, and brought bread and wine to him; while bound and chained down on his back, he consecrated the divine mysteries upon his own breast, and communicated the faithful who were present. He finished his glorious career in prison, and died with the words, “I am a Christian,” on his lips.
I haven't read all of the good fruits that CA has posted, but my opinion from what I have read is that if any of these accounts are true and they were Catholics as in Pope followers, then the fruit is theirs, not the RCC organisation itself.
What I am talking about or addressing in this discussion is not the fruit of Catholics as I am sure there is some great fruit and good people who are Catholics. No I am talking about the organisation itself.
The organisation has some very bad fruit as history testifies. If I had to think of some good fruit, the thing that comes to mind is their stance on abortion. Apart from that, most of what comes to mind is burnings at the stake, murders, not allowing people to read scripture, persecution of the Jews, and other like things.
If a tree has bad fruit, then it is because the root is bad. A good tree does not produce bad fruit. Simple as that for me.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
