ECT THE ARROGANCE & BLINDNESS OF THE PROTESTANT HERESY

[Nihilo]

If we do not learn from the past, we are doomed to repeat it.

It's a lesson the world should NEVER FORGET..

The Holy See hasn't forgotten the lesson, and I have no reason to believe that they ever will.

Nobody may be forced to act against his convictions, nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience in religious matters in private or in public, alone or in association with others, within due limits. This right is based on the very nature of the human person, whose dignity enables him freely to assent to the divine truth which transcends the temporal order. For this reason it continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it.

If because of the circumstances of a particular people special civil recognition is given to one religious community in the constitutional organization of a state, the right of all citizens and religious communities to religious freedom must be recognized and respected as well.

The right to religious liberty is neither a moral license to adhere to error, nor a supposed right to error, but rather a natural right of the human person to civil liberty, i.e., immunity, within just limits, from external constraint in religious matters by political authorities. This natural right ought to be acknowledged in the juridical order of society in such a way that it constitutes a civil right.​

Source.

 

[Cruciform]

If we do not learn from the past, we are doomed to repeat it. It's a lesson the world should NEVER FORGET..

Yes, we should certainly learn from the embarrassingly ill-informed antics of conspiracy-theory flakes like yourself. Sadly, such nonsense has simply been mindlessly repeated for centuries now by those who have no idea whatsoever how to think.

:yawn:

 

[Cruciform]

Yea, this thread is about the RCC not liking when truth is told, when scripture is taught, when people turn to God instead of the pope.

Always ironic to see dyed-in-the-wool non-Christians recite words like "truth," "Scripture," and "God."

 

[HisServant]

Yes, we should certainly learn from the embarrassingly ill-informed antics of conspiracy-theory flakes like yourself. Sadly, such nonsense has simply been mindlessly repeated for centuries now by those who have no idea whatsoever how to think.

:yawn:

I'm not alluding to any conspiracy. All I am stating is the common sense fact that history repeats itself and the RCC did more than its share of killing in the name of their pagan god and pope in the past... to expect them to not turn back to their murderous ways if given the proper motivation would be stupid.

 

[Cross Reference]

Yes, we should certainly learn from the embarrassingly ill-informed antics of conspiracy-theory flakes like yourself. Sadly, such nonsense has simply been mindlessly repeated for centuries now by those who have no idea whatsoever how to think.

:yawn:

Just curious to know what part of that history is nonsense??

 

[Old man]

Yes, we should certainly learn from the embarrassingly ill-informed antics of conspiracy-theory flakes like yourself. Sadly, such nonsense has simply been mindlessly repeated for centuries now by those who have no idea whatsoever how to think.

:yawn:

Do you deny the catholic inquisitions against those who would not yield to their religion?

 

[Cruciform]

I'm not alluding to any conspiracy. All I am stating is the common sense fact that history repeats itself and the RCC did more than its share of killing in the name of their pagan god and pope in the past... to expect them to not turn back to their murderous ways if given the proper motivation would be stupid.

Post #182

 

[Cruciform]

Do you deny the Catholic inquisitions...

Of course not, but I am able to place them in their proper historical context. During the Middle Ages, heresy was considered a capital crime against the state, and was punished accordingly, although death was a comparatively rare occurrence. This was true regarding the Protestant execution of perceived Catholic "heretics" as well. Do you deny the Protestant inquisitions? :think:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[ok doser]

Of course not, but I am able to place them in their proper historical context. During the Middle Ages, heresy was considered a capital crime against the state, and was punished accordingly, although death was a comparatively rare occurrence. This was true regarding the Protestant execution of perceived Catholic "heretics" as well. Do you deny the Protestant inquisitions? :think:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

we should bring them back! :banana:

 

[Old man]

Of course not, but I am able to place them in their proper historical context. During the Middle Ages, heresy was considered a capital crime against the state, and was punished accordingly, although death was a comparatively rare occurrence. This was true regarding the Protestant execution of perceived Catholic "heretics" as well. Do you deny the Protestant inquisitions? :think:

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

No I do not but two wrongs does not make a right and the core of the discussion is the "Catholic Inquisition" so don't try and lead off on a different trail.

As for your "crime against the state" alibi


"It is important here to emphasis Rome's roll in the brutality of the inquisition. Roman Catholic apologists are quick to point out that it was the state that put heretics to death. This is an alibi meant to excuse the Vatican's roll in atrocities, however, the binding force of the laws against heretics lay not in the authority of secular princes, but in the sovereign dominion of life and death over all Christians claimed by the Pope's as God's Representatives on earth as Pope Innocent III expressly states it."



THE INQUISITION

A Study in Absolute Catholic Power

(an article well worth the read that looks into the heart of Catholicism)

www.mtc.org/inquis.html

 

[Hawkins]

That boils down to whether you dare to claim that Protestants are not saved.

If you dare to claim so, you are already the dead who is spreading the heresy.

 

[Cruciform]

No I do not...

Then we both agree that our traditions' actions during the Middle Ages were, at times, less than ideal.

THE INQUISITION: A Study in Absolute Catholic Power

Oh, my. Well, that certainly explains a lot. Unfortunately for your assumptions, your source here has been generally discredited for years, which is why no qualified historian of the Middle Ages would be caught dead appealing to its content. Try again.

Also, the irony of this pseudo-information being put forth by a known non-Christian is once again on display here.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Town Heretic]

Well, that certainly explains a lot. Unfortunately for your assumptions, your source here has been generally discredited for years, which is why no qualified historian of the Middle Ages would be caught dead appealing to its content. Try again.

Haven't read it. Discredited how and by whom? Citation to authority? I took a quick peek and saw PBS using it. I don't know much about it or the author, but that bold a rejection begs support.

Also, the irony of this pseudo-information being put forth by a known non-Christian is once again on display here.

Again, it seems fair that if you're going to go that far with your rhetoric you should establish the foundation of your declaration as rebuttal. And are you saying Old Man isn't a Christian or that the author isn't?

 

[Cruciform]

Haven't read it. Discredited how and by whom? Citation to authority?

Just as all arguments ultimately are.

...are you saying Old Man isn't a Christian or that the author isn't?

Old Man.

 

[Town Heretic]

Just as all arguments ultimately are.

I don't understand your answer. I'm literally asking for a citation establishing your contention that the author and/or his work have been dismissed within the academic circles of historians.

Old Man.

Ah. Don't know him either, though I see he's declared Christian. Not that we haven't had people do that for laughs before.

 

[Cruciform]

I don't understand your answer. I'm literally asking for a citation establishing your contention that the author and/or his work have been dismissed within the academic circles of historians.

Please list a single qualified academic medieval historian who approvingly references Old Man's source.

Ah. Don't know him either, though I see he's declared Christian. Not that we haven't had people do that for laughs before.

He rejects both the Trinity and the Incarnation (Diety) of Jesus Christ. So much for his identification as "Christian."

 

[brewmama]

That boils down to whether you dare to claim that Protestants are not saved.

If you dare to claim so, you are already the dead who is spreading the heresy.

Why? Don't you ( or at least some here) claim Catholics aren't saved?

 

[Town Heretic]

Please list a single qualified academic medieval historian who approvingly references Old Man's source.

I've made no representation regarding the author or the work, so I don't have anything to prove in the matter, having made no particular claim. But in rejecting the offered writing by someone who appears to have credentials you wrote a strong and particular observation:

...your source here has been generally discredited for years, which is why no qualified historian of the Middle Ages would be caught dead appealing to its content. Try again.

Now that's either true or it isn't. It's a statement that asserts something as at least academic common knowledge and a thing known to you. If it isn't true you should retract it.

He rejects both the Trinity and the Incarnation (Diety) of Jesus Christ. So much for his identification as "Christian."

That would definitely qualify for the heretic's part. Had a discussion with Pure who seems to treat a declaration of Christian allegiance as more of a philosophical statement. I don't understand it.

 

[Old man]

I don't understand your answer. I'm literally asking for a citation establishing your contention that the author and/or his work have been dismissed within the academic circles of historians.


Ah. Don't know him either, though I see he's declared Christian. Not that we haven't had people do that for laughs before.

Said to be a non-Christian by a strong defender of the catholic man made false religion (cult) is to me (considering the source) a compliment which proves just the opposite.

Thanks Cruciform. (your arrogant ignorance is useful)

 

[Town Heretic]

Said to be a non-Christian by a strong defender of the catholic man made false religion (cult) is to me (considering the source) a compliment which proves just the opposite.

Thanks Cruciform. (your arrogant ignorance is useful)

Well, I don't know you and my problem was with a claim to facts on his part not in evidence. It's one thing to begin that way if you have them and can produce them (though I'd always argue production at the outset is best) and another to make a claim without them.

As to your difficulties with Catholicism, I'll let you two hammer that out. I don't share your belief about his church, though I'm a Presbyterian, but it doesn't have anything to do with my entry into the discourse, so...

Else, if you deny the divinity of Christ then by the orthodoxy of every major part of the Body within Christendom you're a heretic and outside looking in. I'm not saying that sums you, because we haven't had a discussion on it and I'm unfamiliar with your position. I'm only offering that to be clear on my position in relation to his second statement.