catholicism and the Jewish people - a test case for authority

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Australian Baptist Student, Feb 10, 2003.

  1. Australian Baptist Student

    Australian Baptist Student
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wanted to continue a discussion from several other threads, and hopefully this will be a
    useful exercise.

    My earlier post dealt with how the catholic doctrine of transubstantiation was
    historically intertwined with mass murder, and is reproduced below.:
    Historically, this doctrine has been the direct cause of untold suffering and bloodshed.
    While the doctrine may have been around before 12?? when it was officially proclaimed,
    it does seem that at this time a special effort was made to impress the doctrine on the
    faithful. I am speaking about the so-called ‘Host Desecrations’. From the thirteenth to the
    eighteenth centuries, claims were made across Europe that Jews had broken into
    churches in order to once more abuse the body of Christ. During these occasions, the
    wafer was said to variously shed tears, grow wings and try to escape by flying around the
    room, beg for mercy, and bleed human blood. (see M. Hay. 1975). In claiming that the
    Jews did such things, the claimants were attributing to the Jewish people Catholic
    beliefs, and the faithful who heard about these things went away with a hightened
    awarness of the reality of transubstantiation.

    For example, in 1555 Bishop Lippomano (whom the pope sent as papal Inquisitor to
    Poland) brought charges of host desecration against a Jewish girl and three Jewish men.
    These were then executed “on charges of having maltreated a stolen wafer until it had
    begun to bleed”. Before their deaths, these Jewish people declared; “It never occurred to
    us to pierce the host, for we could never believe that it was the body of God. God is
    incorporeal, just as a wafer is bloodless”. Acting from their own mythology, the Christian
    judges did not believe this claim, and ordered the executioner to “ram burning torches
    into the victims’ mouths”. Thousands of Jews died across Europe in similar
    circumstances. For example, in 1243 the entire Jewish population of Berlin was burned
    alive for allegedly torturing a wafer. Likewise, in 1389, three thousand Jews were killed
    in Prague on a similar charge.

    In the village of Deggendorf, up into the 1930s, each year approximately 10,000 visitors
    attended week long celebrations and a play written by a Benedictine monk,
    commemorating the appearance of “a lovely child” from a consecrated wafer allegedly
    stolen and tortured by the town’s Jews on September 30, 1337. In response to the
    “incident,” the chroniclers of the time reported that on the same day, acting out of
    “legitimate zeal, pleasing to God,” the citizens of Deggendorf massacred the entire
    Jewish population of the town. One of the town churches has a picture of the massacre,
    and under it an inscription reading: “that our fatherland be forever free from this hellish
    scum.”

    Interestingly for you, Carson, the Franciscan reformer John Capistrano (who recieved the
    title “the scourge of the Jews” from the pope, in recognition of his hard work for the
    humiliation of the Jews in Sicily), in his capacity as Inquisitor for the Jews in Germanic
    and Slavonic countries, staged a Host descecration trial in Breslau, during which the
    entire Jewish population of Breslau was imprisoned. Capistrano presided as Chief
    Inquisitor, personally supervising the torture of some of the accused. He won the trial, 40
    Jews were burnt to death, their children torn from the community to be raised as
    “Christians”, with the rest of the community being bannished.

    As bread does not weep, fly or bleed, John (like hundreds of other priests across Europe
    for the next 300 years) lied in open court, in his official capacity as a catholic church
    official, to confirm the belief in transubstantiation, and with the result that Jews were murdered, expelled or kidnapped. John of Capistrano was later made a “saint” of the
    Catholic church. Either lying and murder of Jews was a good thing, or, for a man named by the pope as “scourge of the Jews”, it was too unimportant to worry about. They should have arrested him and charged him with mass murder, but they chose rather to make him a saint.

    So Carson, you like to trace the history of your beliefs. In the hands of catholic priests,
    the belief in transubstantiation has been directly responsible for the torture and murder of
    thousands. A guy who did this was officially promoted to sainthood! - does all of this
    concern you? A tree is judged by its fruit.

    After Carson replied, I wrote; Thaks for replying, Carson. I was not trying to be
    offensive, but my life has ben devoted to Jewish evangelism. Im glad you know of John of Capistrano. How can a guy like that still be a saint? This remains a genuine and
    understandable cause of offense to Jewish people to this day. Why doesn't the church desaint him? Do you pray to him?

    More generally, this history is relevant when you ask us to accept the Catholic church's history and practice as a revelation of God's will. If it can be shown that the official teachings, doctrine, Papal rulings, ecclesiastical laws etc have been a source of profound sin over 1700 years, then the very history in which catholics boast becomes evidence against you.

    Are Catholics taught to check everything against the standard of the Bible, God’s Word
    to us, or are they taught that the Bible is only one of several equally valid authorities,
    church history and tradition being equally important, and indeed, as it was church
    councils that determined the Bible, their authority is perhaps even greater (as a catholic
    on Phatmas wrote)? Equally, the Bible is hard to understand, not a matter of private
    interpretation anyway, and as it is only one of several authorities, why not just go to your
    priest, as he has his finger on all the authorities, and do what ever he tells you? Ed wrote of the virtues of blind obedience to the Catholic church on another thread, but if you are
    not taught to question, to check everything against the holy Word of God, then how will
    you know if the church commands you to sin against God? It is a thought pattern that
    goes against what you have been taught.

    To quote from your catechism, “Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at
    seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service,
    Christ endowed the Church's shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of
    faith and morals.” So, if a Catholic, by obeying the direct and clear instructions of his
    priests, bishops, councils, Popes and saints, sins as a result, your system is shown to be a
    lie. I wish it wasn’t, that Christianity did not apostacise, but it did, and it is harmful to
    pretend otherwise. You cant in one breath quote Cardinal Newman(?) “to study history is
    to be a Catholic”, and in the next, dismiss all negative history as either irrelevant, minor
    or say, “yes, but look at protestant history.”

    How do you see it?
    Take care, Colin
     
  2. GraceSaves

    GraceSaves
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    Colin,

    You are once again attributing acts of violence an air of infallibility. No Pope or Magesterium has ever proclaimed infallible doctrine that resulted in mistreatment of others. These were individual decisions, possibly made by those in high power; that does not mean that they spoke with infallible authority, for they did not.

    These occurances were not based on an infallible decree. Must we keep going in circles?

    God bless,

    Grant
     
  3. Bible-belted

    Bible-belted
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think Colin makes a good point. Should such an obvious truth always believed by all be required to be rammed down peoples throats like hot irons and believed on threat? That such was necessary puts the lie to RC claims that transsubstantiation is a historic apostolic doctrine. It was not even the consensus belief at the time it was promulgated.
     
  4. Nimrod

    Nimrod
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    0
    I get almost the same reply when I talk to Mormons. They say: "Well that's their opinion".

    Nice job Colin.
     
  5. GraceSaves

    GraceSaves
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    Guys,

    If it was an infallible teaching of the Church, it would still be present today. That's the nature of something infallible; it doesn't change; it's here to stay.

    Therefore, these events are historic events that have nothing to do with doctrines of faith and morals. Compare me to a Mormon if you like; that doesn't make it any more true.

    God bless,

    Grant
     
  6. Rakka Rage

    Rakka Rage
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    0
    so the pope can just turn the infallibility on or off? certain documents are infallible? or certain people at certain times?

    Rom.3
    [10] As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
     
  7. Australian Baptist Student

    Australian Baptist Student
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi there, Grant. We are talking about habitual abuse here, repeatedly confirmed by the highest catholic officials, saints and legal rulings. The question remains, should catholics obey their leaders, or can such obedience directly cause them to sin? Cane Catholic rulings contain errors (sin) re doctrine and morals?

    Jewish populations were expelled from numerous european lands 1000-1500AD, at the urging of the Catholic church in these lands. In Spain, 400,000 Jews were expelled (many to slavery) at the urging of the Inquisitor General, Torquemadan. Likewise the French expulsions were seen as proof that the king was a good catholic. The English bishops of Oxford, in 1222, issued an injunction forbidding Christians, under pain of excommunication, to sell any provisions to the Jews; but the king refused to sanction this proposal. In 1290, the king did however expell all Jews from England.

    After the policy of expulsins, the catholic church lurned to ghettoes, prisons for all Jews- and this remained their official policy for over 400 years. On March 5, 1233, Pope Gregory XI wrote to the archbishops and bishops of Germany complaining that the German Jews were not living in “the state of complete misery to which they had been condemned by God.”

    Thomas Aquinas had agreed with this, and preached the idea that Jews must be compelled to live in perpetual slavery. Pope Innocent III re-stated this in a letter to the Archbishop of Seus and the Bishop of Paris (15 July 1205): “The Jews are condemned to eternal slavery.” A Papal legate presided over the Council of Breslau in 1266. This
    council decreed that Jews must not live side by side with Christians, and advised special
    quarters for Jews who must also wear pointed hats and a red badge. A year later, in 1267 the Council of Vienna urged the total separation of Jews from society. Their exclusion from the common law of humanity was explicitly affirmed in 1268, by the Jewry-law of Brunn, where it was written: “The Jews are deprived of their natural rights and condemned to eternal misery for their sins.” In 1516 the first Ghetto was established in
    Venice. In 1555 Pope Paul IV, in his bull, cum nimbis abserdum, confirmed that Jews had been condemned by God to eternal slavery, decreed the establishment of “Ghettos” throughout Europe.

    In 1775, Vatican edicts further isolated the Jews:

    The Jews may not play, nor eat nor drink nor have any other familiarity or conversation with Christians, nor Christians with Jews, whether in buildings, houses, or vineyards, nor on the street, or in inns, taverns, stores or elsewhere.
    And innkeepers, bartenders and storekeepers shall not permit conversation between Christians and Jews.

    In 1823, one of the first acts of the new pope, Leo XII, was to order the Jews back into
    the ghetto: “to overcome the evil consequences of the freedom [they] have enjoyed.” Leo
    also asked the Office of the Inquisition to make sure that all of the ancient restrictions on
    Jews were being enforced. Following their report, the Vatican issued orders that Jews
    were not to be permitted to leave the ghetto for even a single day without a written permit from the Criminal Tribunal. Fear of disease led in 1836 to the public health commission sending Prince Odescalchi to investigate conditions within the ghetto of Rome. He reported that the inhabitants lived in “untold misery.” There was no hospital in the ghetto, and Jews were not allowed by the Vatican to become doctors. They were also forbidden to open bookstores, or go to public schools. This was the mercy of the
    popes towards the Jews in the mid 1800s.

    In 1843, Prince Metternich of Austria, whose troops had again helped the Vatican retake
    the Papal states, asked the pope if he could cease his policy of re-ghettoisation. Coming
    from such an important backer, the prince’s request was answered by the pope himself.

    The prohibitions on the Jews, forbidding them from employing Christian servants or wetnurses, from owning real estate ... from living outside [ghetto] walls mixed in and confused with Christians, are prohibitions founded in the sacred Canon. These ... command the separation of Christians and Jews. The pope went on to note: “the scandal of seeing Jews pretending to be living the same as others.” Jews living outside of the ghetto, the pope concluded: “cannot be tolerated in the
    Ecclesiastical State, because they are openly contrary to the most sacrosanct principles of
    the Ecclesiastical laws.” A year later, the pope called on parish priests to ensure that
    their parishioners had no social contact with Jews. In 1849, Rome itself was liberated by
    Garibaldi’s forces. The pope fled, the ghetto was opened and Jews were given equal rights. In 1850, Pius IX was returned to Rome by the troops of France. He then abolished the proclamation of Jewish civil equality and ordered the Jews back into the ghetto. When informed that Tuscany was considering allowing the emancipation to stand, to
    pope called this “a true crime.” By 1861, only Rome remained under papal rule, and only Rome retained its ghetto. In 1870 the pope was forced to retreat into the Vatican, and Romes’ Jews were finally emancipated. In 1871, the pope told a Catholic women’s organisation that Jews were “dogs.” He continued: “We have today in Rome
    unfortunately too many of these dogs, and we hear them barking in all the streets, and
    going around molesting people everywhere.”

    The Vatican objection to Jewish freedom did not go away. In 1890 the Civilta Cattolica
    was calling for the abolition of “civic equality” and for the segregation of Jews from the
    rest of society. This article was also included in a pamphlet of reprints that the Civilta
    Cattolica published in 1891 on “The Jewish Question.” In 1898 the editor of Civilta
    Cattolica again spoke out against the granting of citizenship to the Jewish people. Likewise, L’Osservatore Romano wrote in 1898 that Jews “cannot and must not live among others.” This was a mere 35 years before Hitler would take power in Germany.

    So, did catholics who obeyed the direct orders of their popes and church councils, and persecuted and imprisoned their Jewish neighbours, thereby breaking God's commandments to love your neighbour, and to do good to the stranger in your midst, sin? Are the rulings of popes and church councils free from errors of doctrine and morals? Remember, a pope ordered these sins on the basis of "sacred canon" and ecclesiastical laws.

    Take care, Colin
     
  8. Australian Baptist Student

    Australian Baptist Student
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi again,
    This thread is basically looking at the question, "can catholics sin by obeying their church synods and authorities?" As someone committed to Jewish evangelism, I am taking the example of that history to demonstrate that ordinary magesterium is not free from errors in morals. Only God's word is pure and infallable.
    A number of more recent examples of church synods recomending sin are given below. Thank God that such rulings are no longer catholic policy, but historically, blind obedience to the church was a recipe for sin.

    In May, 1939, at a national Catholic convention of Hungary, attended by the Synod of Bishops, Cardinal Seredi and government ministers, one of the speakers, the deputy chairman of Actio Catholica, stated in an address entitled Christianity and Social Justice: “It is not enough to remove Jews from economic positions of power. We are obliged to introduce a true Christian spirit and Christian morality as well into each field of our lives.” Actio Catholica was supported by the Synod of Bishops, and led by a bishop. A prominent leader of it wrote an article in 1939 for the paper Magyarsag. In it, he noted the anti-Jewish prohibitions of the Popes and church councils over the centuries. He then stated: “These papal decrees and synod resolutions have never been abrogated. Consequently, they all these decrees are valid to this day.” Cardinal Seredi likewise noted that he considered it “very important to limit the activities of the Jews and to remove the Jewish spirit from the public and economic domains, as well as from additional walks of life.” No one at the synod spoke against the idea of anti-Jewish legislation, the Bishop of Szekesfehervar stressing that “the synod of bishops was unanimous in its desire to put an end to Jewish destructiveness” and the apostolic delegate of Rozsnyo demanding that “additional, very firm steps be taken to remove the Jewish spirit.” At the same time, the ecclesiastical paper, Namzeti Ujsag carried an article which asked:

    Does anti-Semitism contradict Catholicism? Not at all! Ever since the inception of Christianity, a struggle with no compromise has been waged unceasingly between the church and Judaism. Our Lord Jesus began this struggle on a practical level when he drove out at a whip’s end the moneychangers from the Temple ... the popes and church councils, year after year, generation after generation, have engaged in legislating laws to limit the rights of Jews and to issue decrees aimed at achieving this goal.

    The writer went on to list many of these laws and decrees, and concluded: “No one has ever cancelled these papal edicts and church laws. And so they are all valid in our day as well.” This article appeared while the second anti-Jewish bill was being debated in
    parliament. Note also that in this debate, Bishop Glattfelder also spoke with approval of former popes and church leaders who had enacted numerous anti-Jewish laws.

    Was the official catholic church of Hungary anti-semitic? The Polish church was at least as bad, leading the campain to boycott all Jewish stores. In a synod of Polish bishops resolved in 1937 to demand that Jewish children be segregated in schools, and that Jews be prohibited from teaching Polish children. In 1936 the Polish episcopate and the primate of Poland endorsed a student pilgrimage to the town of Czestochowa, the site of the holiest Catholic shrine in Poland. Sixty percent of the entire university student population of Poland attended, and issued a declaration that “We will not rest until the last Jew, alive or dead, has left Polish soil.”

    In April 1942, the Catholic episcopate of Slovakia issued a pastoral letter. It declared that the Jews were a cursed people because of their deicide: "Also, in our eyes has the influence of the Jews been pernicious. .. Not only economically, but also in the cultural and moral spheres, they have harmed our people. The church cannot be opposed, therefore, if the state with legal actions eradicates the dangerous influence of the Jews." The 'legal actions' here refered to the deportation of Slovakia's Jews to Poland.

    If you were a good catholic in these lands, by obeying your synod of bishops, you would have committed sin. God commanded us to love our neighbours, and to do good to the stranger in our midst.

    Take care, Colin
     
  9. Australian Baptist Student

    Australian Baptist Student
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    To quote from your catechism, “Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church's shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals.”
    Grant, your church officially, for hundreds of years taught the persecution of Jews. It is not infallable in the area of morals. Your shepherds did not have the charisma of infallability in moral areas.

    Your setting up of church history and tradition as an authority equal to that of the Bible is proved by your church's own history and tradition to be wrong. People who believed this sinned as a result.
    Take care, Colin
     
  10. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is what the Catholic Church teaches officially concerning anti-Semitism:

    (note: this is the Church's infallible teaching regarding faith and morals, unlike Particular Councils and Bishop Synods, which are not infallible)

    Nostra Aetate 4 - "Furthermore, in her rejection of every persecution against any man, the Church, mindful of the patrimony she shares with the Jews and moved not by political reasons but by the Gospel's spiritual love, decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone."

    Personally, I feel like it is ludicrous to say:

    (1) A Doctrine is taught
    (2) People forced other people to believe this doctrine and people fought over the doctrine.
    (3) The Doctrine must be untrue.

    Use your brains, people. [​IMG]
     
  11. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Grant, your church officially, for hundreds of years taught the persecution of Jews.

    This is to gravely misunderstand what "to teach infallibly in matters of faith and morals" means. First, I suggest studying what a Catholic means when they say this, then proceed to make your accusations.
     
  12. DanPC

    DanPC
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Colin, I think you are terribly mistaken in judging people in different centuries by your 21st century standards. Would someone be able to be elected President of the US that had a slave today? NO. But it happened in the past when slavery was not considered the same way it is now. One doesn't judge the early Presidents that had slaves like one would now.
    If you look back less than 100 years in the US you would find a society that did not tolerate any form of birth control. Now thanks mainly to Protestant sects deviating from the moral norm, birth control is seen as a positive and to many as a duty.
    Secondly, you are getting back far enough into history where church and state were one. So religious unrest was not merely a church problem but a civil problem as well. Heresies were preached against and sometimes put down for what they often were--rebellion. You might note that civil wars are still fought today over religious differences--N Ireland, Sudan and many other places.
    Desecration of the Host may be difficult to understand for those that reject the almost 2000 year teachings of the Catholic Church on the Eucharist. Desecration of a Host is not only a rejection of Catholicism but a direct insult to our Lord. There have been many martyrs in the Catholic Church that have died trying to protect the Host from desecration. If someone announced today that they were going to break into a Catholic Church and desecrate a Host there may be bloodshed even today as some would protect Our Lord from this desecration.
    To address your contention that Hosts do not bleed, fly, etc. I would agree that they normally do not but there have been Eucharistic miracles where a Host has shed blood.

    I don't doubt that there were abuses in the preaching against heresies. But considering the times, perhaps not nearly as many as you allege. If the allegations against the Jews and other heretics were true then the society in that day and age dictated what type of punishment they would receive, much like society does today.

    I think if you want to take a look at the Catholic Church and Jews in WWII that you might be pleasantly surprised.
     
  13. thessalonian

    thessalonian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aussie Baptist,

    First I would have to say that before it would be worth my time to answer your accusations, it would behove me to dig in to the stories that you relate and see if they are true and what the circumstances were. Something I don't have time to do at the moment. Judging from past experience it isn't worth my time as it would not convince you even if I did find the author of the information to be a total liar. Chances are he has part of the truth like the serpant did in the garden. It's the part that isn't true that is the problem. I know that some of the middle age treatement of the Jews in France was caused by a couple of priests who Got the public stirred up in hatred about the Jews, much like happened in Protestant Germany in Hitler's time. It is not too uncommon for Baptists and others to distort the historical context of tragedies in the past, some of which involved Cathoilcs not living their faith. The Pope may have ordered inquisitions but he did not order what followed. And there wasn't email and the 6pm news to let him know what was going on contrary to what you people think. What happened in France as I recall got a firm rebuke from the Pope when word got back to him. I know this won't be good enough for you, but contrary to popular belief he didn't have an army to send.

    Further, inquisitions were not just a Catholic thing as a man named Servetus would tell you if he had not been burned by some Calvinists. Hey don't you Baptists adhere to some Calvinist doctrine. Tulip or something. Seems the Geneva inquistion rounded up the woodpile and there was a guy named John Calvin who approved of the brand of matches that were used.

    One other thing you could perhaps help me with before you sink your head in the sand any further. I am trying to guess what religious afflication, the KKK generally was associated with. You know, burning Churches, dragging blacks behind cars, burning crossess on the lawns of Catholics in the neighborhood. Perhaps this article will help you with your answer. Seems a baptist pastor or two might have put on those white robes and not so long ago. Do you suppose these were saved Baptist pastors who saved other people?

    http://www.detnet.com/wilke/klan1.html

    Oh I know you will duck this by saying, boys will be boys. Perhaps later I will take up the time to look in to what Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli said to do with heretics. It wasn't nearly as pleasent as you might imagine.

    Blessings.
     
  14. CatholicConvert

    CatholicConvert
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2001
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll be even more direct and to the point, Colin.

    Why don't you knock off this silly BS escapade of yours in your futile attempts to trash the Church.

    If you wish to discuss doctrine. Fine.

    Otherwise

    SHUT UP!!!

    We are growing tired of your screed!!!

    It is meaningless and pointless to every Catholic here.
     
  15. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    History spseaks for itself and Catholic history "shouts"!!

    As this thread shows.

    The only RC response is to "ignore" the deeds, pronouncements, abuses of their own church.

    But let me ask all on this board a question. Imagine for a moment that the Methodist church were to sanction "ramming torches down their victims throats"? Imagine that they would "reward" those who did so? Imagine that EVEN today they would STILL refuse to identify those specific actions as "bad"...

    Then you have the RCC.

    Imagine if Methodist began to pray to their dead. Imagine if they built altars, shrines, temples to them. Imagine if they claimed the power to cause bread to become the body of God. Imagine if they claimed to be infallible. Imagine if they burned the ONLY bibles available in the common language. Imagine if they condemned anyone for pointing out their unkind deeds and exaulted their missionary work as "a valid balancing work" of the church by comparison?

    How long would you "fellowship" with such a "Methodist church"??

    And yet we DO fellowship with our Catholic bretheren in spite of all that.

    Grace.

    In christ,

    Bob
     
  16. Australian Baptist Student

    Australian Baptist Student
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi there, Carson,
    I assumed it meant that if you followed the official teachings of your church, you were guarenteed that you would not sin by so doing. My understanding is that the pope has an office of oversight re national synods, would he correct them if they were wrong?
    I would be happy for you to explain it to me.
    My sources for the above posts have been catholic historians and achademic texts.

    I note with sadness that not one catholic reply has begun with any expression of sorrow or grief that such sufferings could have been inflicted in the name of your church.

    Take care, Colin
     
  17. Australian Baptist Student

    Australian Baptist Student
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Ed,
    are papal bulls, popes quoting canon law, the official words of synods of bishops, the deeds of saints etc meaningless and pointless to catholics? Is Jewish suffering meaningless and pointless to catholics?

    Have a cold shower and answer nicely. From memory, you are the guy who told me the virtues of blind obedience to the catholic church leaders. Im the guy who pointed out that such an attitude would have led you to sin.

    Do take care, Colin
     
  18. DanPC

    DanPC
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    160
    Likes Received:
    0
    "And yet we DO fellowship with our Catholic bretheren in spite of all that."
    I suppose we shouldn't fellowship with witch burning or KKK Baptists either, should we?
    The only shouting re history is a failure of some to judge others based on what was normal or accepted for their times. I don't deny abuses happened but heretics were persecuted for the same reasons that terrorists are now--they disrupted law and order.

    "I note with sadness that not one catholic reply has begun with any expression of sorrow or grief that such sufferings could have been inflicted in the name of your church."
    Perhaps when yours does the same. I had no part in any of the abuses of the past.

    "Im the guy who pointed out that such an attitude would have led you to sin."
    Which sins are those? Preaching the Gospel enthusiastically? Protecting the sacred Host from desecration?

    You have yet to show how your BLASPHEMOUS statement regarding the Eucharist and mass murder are historically intertwined. These types of allegations are nothing more than L Boettner type. If you want to confront abuses you might start by not making blasphemous statements yourself.
    Good night.
     
  19. neal4christ

    neal4christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe some do, but it is not the basis for Baptist doctrine. The president of the Baptist school I attend is definitely anti-Calvinist.

    Neal
     
  20. Australian Baptist Student

    Australian Baptist Student
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi thess,
    in general, baptists have avoided persecuting, believing in seperation of church and state, and the freedom of people to choose their own beliefs. Equally clearly, baptist history is far from perfect! That is just my point!! We know we are fallable, we know we are just forgiven sinners clinging to Jesus. We would not presume to preach our own history as an infallable guide to morals. We know we need to conform all our behaviour to the inspired God breathed words of Scripture, and accept nothing of ourselves as equal to that.

    Take care, Colin
     

Share This Page

Loading...