Lies the Roman Church tells the Inquistion

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

In 1244, their power was further increased by the emperor Frederic II, who declared himself the protector and friend of all the inquisitors, and published the cruel edicts, viz.,
1. That all heretic who continued obstinate, should be burnt.
2. That all heretics who repented, should be imprisoned for life.
Pg. 94


Of the multitudes who perished by the Inquisition throughout the world, no authentic record is now discoverable. But wherever popery had power, there was the tribunal. It had been planted even in the east, and the Portuguese Inquisition of Goa was, until within these few years, fed with many an agony. South America was partitioned into provinces of the Inquisition; and with a ghastly mimicry of the crimes of the mother state, the arrivals of viceroys, and the other popular celebrations were thought imperfect without an auto da fÈ.

The Netherlands were one scene of slaughter from the time of the decree which planted the Inquisition among them. In Spain the calculation is more attainable. Each of the seventeen tribunals during a long period burned annually, on an average, ten miserable beings! We are to recollect that this number was in a country where persecution had for ages abolished all
religious differences, and where the difficulty was not to find the stake, but the offering. Yet, even in Spain, thus gleaned of all heresy, the Inquisition could still swell its lists of murders to thirty-two thousand! The numbers burned in effigy, or condemned to penance, punishments generally equivalent to exile, confiscation and taint of blood, to all ruin but the mere loss of worthless life, amounted to three hundred and nine thousand. But the crowds who perished in dungeons of torture, of confinement and of broken hearts, the millions of dependent lives made utterly helpless, or hurried to the grave by the death of the victims, are beyond all register; or recorded only before HIM, who has sworn that “He that leadeth into captivity, shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword.”

pg. 127; FOXE'S BOOK OF MARTYRS by John Foxe

As can be seen, from a more reliable source, the Inquistion began long before 1244. It ended several centuries later. I recommend reading a good history book for more details.

[mcmstaff78]

Still far short of "millions". And Foxe's Book of Martyrs, while generally accurate regarding those who died during Foxe's lifetime, is a polemical treatise and it appears that many who were "martyrs" were actually traitors or even common criminals. Foxe's intent, however, was to portray the Latin Church and it's supporters in the most horrendous light possible. According to David Loades in "Foxes' Book of Martyrs and the Face of England," History Today Dec. 2005,<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

We now believe that most of these men were far from being the demons that Foxe represented them to be. They were conscientiously performing a necessary task, which most of them found profoundly distasteful. Far from thirsting for their victims' blood, they would have been satisfied with the most equivocal submission. They were driven, not by the Devil, or even by the Pope, but by the Queen, whose hatred of heresy was paranoid, and who considered it to be her solemn duty to eradicate it by whatever means were available. It was a cancer which had to be cauterized.

This though did not suit John Foxe. A staunch upholder of the Royal Supremacy, he did not wish to present Mary as an evil tyrant. Some Protestant controversialists, such as Christopher Goodman, had argued that the Godly had a duty to rise up against idolatrous rulers, but Foxe remained true to Thomas Cranmer's principle of non-resistance. Tyranny could be a subjective classification, and Elizabeth, illogically but steadfastly, refused to condemn her sister's government as illegitimate. She was quite willing to destroy her predecessor's reputation, but not to represent her regime as unlawful. The line Foxe took, therefore, was that Mary had made a disastrous mistake in readmitting the authority of the Pope, and from that the whole tragedy had sprung. By placing her authority at the service of a False Church, she had allowed a corrupt priesthood to wreck their vengeance upon the Godly.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>For your elucidation.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Quoting: "accurate regarding those who died during Foxe's lifetime."
End quote.

You obviously never read Foxe.

[mcmstaff78]

Ah, way to put me in my place.

[plow_deep]

<font color="0000ff">Howdy mcmstaff78,</font>

<font color="0000ff">You said above,</font>
<font color="119911">"...and it appears that many who were "martyrs" were actually traitors or even common criminals."</font>

<font color="0000ff">LOL!!! According to Official Roman Catholic Dogma almost all non-catholic Christians are criminals. Below is some excerpts from "Catholicism Unveiled" by Mary Ann Collins</font>

The Council of Trent anathematized every Christian who disagrees with any detail of Catholic doctrine. These anathemas have never been revoked.

An anathema means that the Catholic Church has placed someone under a solemn, ecclesiastical curse. There is a solemn ritual for doing this. It is done by the Pope, assisted by 12 priests. According to the words of the ritual (which you can read in “The Catholic Encyclopedia”) the “criminal” is consigned to hell. However, if he repents and submits to the Catholic Church, then the Pope can remove the anathema.

The Council of Trent (1545-1564) was the Roman Catholic Church’s response to the Protestant Reformation. It denounced every single doctrine that was proposed by the Protestant Reformers. It declared that any person who believes even one of these doctrines is “anathema” (anathematized by the Catholic Church).

It also defined Catholic doctrines, detail by detail, and declared that anybody who denies even one of these details is anathema. These doctrines include: the authority of the Pope, the practice of indulgences, veneration of Mary and the saints, the use of statues and other “sacred images,” and the belief that Jesus Christ is literally and fully present (body, blood, soul, and divinity) in every crumb of consecrated bread and every drop of consecrated wine. So the Council of Trent anathematized all Protestants.

There are 125 anathemas. These are doctrinal declarations of the Council of Trent that are sandwiched between two statements. The opening statement is: “If any man...” The closing statement is: “...let him be anathema.” The doctrinal statements and the anathemas are so interwoven that they cannot be separated.

I don’t have permission to use quotations from the Council of Trent, so I will use a statement about a well-known children’s book as an example. Applying the language of the Council of Trent to “Mother Goose Rhymes,” you could say: “If any man does not believe that the cow jumped over the moon, let him be anathema.”

The declarations and anathemas of the Council of Trent have never been revoked. On the contrary, the decrees of the Council of Trent are confirmed by both the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and the official “Catechism of the Catholic Church” (1992).

Cont

[plow_deep]

The documents of the Second Vatican Council cite the Council of Trent as an authority for doctrinal statements, both in the text and in the notes. The “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church” states that the Second Vatican Council “proposes again the decrees of” three previous councils, one of which is the Council of Trent.[3] The “Decree on the Training of Priests” says that the Second Vatican Council continued the work of the Council of Trent.[4]

When the Second Vatican Council began, Pope John XXIII said that he accepted what the Council of Trent declares about justification. (It declares that any person who believes that we are saved by faith alone is anathema.) He also confirmed all past anathemas against “false doctrine”--in other words, the Protestant doctrines that were condemned by the Council of Trent. Every Catholic clergyman who participated in the Council signed a document affirming the declarations of the Council of Trent.

THE ANATHEMAS OF THE COUNCIL
OF TRENT CANNOT BE REVOKED

According to the “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” the Catholic doctrine of infallibility applies not only to the Pope, but also to Catholic Church Councils. This includes the Council of Trent.

6. You can check this out for yourself. “The Catechism of the Catholic Church” is available online with a search engine. Do a search for “Council of Trent.” If these addresses don’t work for you, then do an Internet search for “Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

www.christusrex.org/www2/kerygma/ccc/searchcat.html (http://www.christusrex.org/www2/kerygma/ccc/searchcat.html)

7. “The Catechism of the Catholic Church,” Paragraph 891.

As a result, the official statements of the Council of Trent are considered to be infallible. This means that they cannot be changed. Therefore, the anathemas of the Council of Trent cannot be revoked.

The Catholic Church may find it expedient not to call people’s attention to these anathemas, but it cannot revoke them.

<font color="0000ff">I hereby declare that that dude with the silly looking hat that leads the RCC and goes by the title of Pope HOLDS ABSOLUTELY ZERO AUTHORITY OVER ME WHATSOEVER IN MATTERS OF FAITH OR ANY AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER OF ANY KIND.</font>

<font color="0000ff">I hope I make myself clear.</font>

<font color="0000ff">I believe I'm saved by my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone and answer to nobody else's authority but His in matters of my beliefs.</font>


<font color="0000ff">Peace</font>

[pro610]

Plow said...
“Below is some excerpts from “Catholicism Unveiled” by Mary Ann Collins “

Mary Ann Collins does not seem to exist.
There is NOT any records of this person ever being a nun as is claimed and no one has even seen her.

Regardless of this,some of the excerpts posted are outright lies

Just one example is this statement

“These doctrines include: the authority of the Pope, the practice of indulgences, veneration of Mary and the saints, the use of statues and other “sacred images,” and the belief that Jesus Christ is literally and fully present (body, blood, soul, and divinity) in every crumb of consecrated bread and every drop of consecrated wine.”

What the writer(probably one of Jack Chick,s evil minions) does not tell the readers is that all of these teachings have been taught for over 2000 years, especially the teaching on Eucharist and veneration of Mary.

The teaching on Eucharist has ALWAYS been that Christ is LITERALLY AND FULLY PRESENT.(transubstantiation)

Never was the Eucharist ever taught to be a symbol.NEVER!

EVERY SINGLE early Church Father taught the Real Presence ,there is not even a single exception.

This teaching on Eucharist being just a symbol is a lie from the 16th century that came from satan working thru some of the reformers.
Dear friend, you have been robbed and deceived


Go ahead and try and find a Church document or writing from ANY Saint or Church father that says the Eucharist is just a symbol and NOT the real Presence?

It DOES NOT EXIST!
This is not even debatable

I can show you thousands of writings and teachings on Eucharist that say it is Jesus fully present.
The Scripture typology and the prefiguring of the Blessed Sacrament is overwhelming.

Here is a few examples from Saint Ignatius-who knew the Apostle John

St. Ignatius became the third bishop of Antioch, succeeding St. Evodius, who was the immediate successor of St. Peter. He heard St. John preach and knew St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Seven of his letters written to various Christian communities have been preserved. Eventually, he received the martyr’s crown as he was thrown to wild beasts in the arena.

“Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

“Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

“Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ.”

-”Letter to the Ephesians”, paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.

“I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed.”

-”Letter to the Romans”, paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.

I wish you a Blessed day!

[ba2]

pro - readers of Chick have no desire to prove anything said which promotes a distrust of the Catholic church. If Chick wrote it, it must be true. So, don't try to confuse them with the facts.

It is one thing to be a non-believer of Catholicism, I certainly don’t agree with everything the RCC promotes. It is another to continue to spread lies, just because it fits their own belief. We used to have Chick tracs lying around the house, until I actually read one. May as well read the “DaVinci Code” or even “The Odyssey” as truth.