English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Jesus is the Head of the Churches.
God is the Father.
The Apostles did their work by founding churches in numerous places & leaving us the scriptures (which contain the tradition of the Apostles).

The first & second century believers adjusted to the absence of the Apostles and made sure that each church had numerous copies and translations of the scriptures.

This whole control issue did not come up, until Rome lost it's status as the Capital of the Empire.

Why was Catholic Missions so violent? Why did they use the turn or burn concept in trying to force the non-catholics they encountered outside the realms of the old Roman Empire to submit them?

2007-11-13 16:16:24 · 9 answers · asked by realchurchhistorian 4 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

9 answers

You think THATS bad, CHECK THIS OUT! The sick and twisted mentality of the Catholic Church leaders apparently think that they have the POWER to even cause JESUS to become submissive to them!

Let us first examine Roman Catholic belief. Once again, we are quoting from Roman Catholic sources. The first source to be quoted is from St. Thomas, reprinted in the Catholic book, "Faith of Millions", John O'Brien, Ph.D., LL.D., 268-269, "nihil obstat" by Rev. T. E. Dillon-Censor Librorum and "imprimatur" by John Francis Noll, D.D. -Bishop of Fort Wayne.

" Power of Consecrating: The supreme power of the priestly office is the power of consecrating. 'No act is greater,' says St. Thomas, 'than the consecration of the body of Christ.' In this essential phase of the sacred ministry, the power of the priest is not surpassed by that of the bishop, the archbishop, the cardinal or the pope. Indeed it is equal to that of Jesus Christ. For in this role the priest speaks with the voice and the authority of God Himself. WHEN THE PRIEST PRONOUNCES THE TREMENDOUS WORDS OF CONSECRATION, HE REACHES UP INTO HEAVENS, BRINGS CHRIST DOWN FROM HIS THRONE, AND PLACES HIM UPON OUR ALTAR TO BE OFFERED UP AGAIN AS THE VICTIM FOR THE SINS OF MAN."

"It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperors: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim. Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. For, while the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, THE PRIEST BRINGS CHRIST DOWN FROM HEAVEN, AND RENDERS HIM PRESENT ON OUR ALTAR AS THE ETERNAL VICTIM FOR THE SINS OF MAN - NOT ONCE BUT A THOUSAND TIMES! THE PRIEST SPEAKS AND LO! CHRIST THE ETERNAL AND OMNIPOTENT GOD, BOWS HIS HEAD IN HUMBLE OBEDIENCE TO THE PRIEST'S COMMAND."


How SICK is that? And also, HOW DARE THEY!

2007-11-13 16:33:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

There were many who faltered in the beliefs back in the early days of the Church. They murdered, pillaged, raped, and stole. They were vandals. But, this is also the beginning of the most beautiful thing on earth, the Catholic Church. Many of the Fathers of the Church wrote during this time. During this time of turmoil, warfare, and despair, the Church stood out as a way to find peace and sociality. Why did the barbarians who sacked Rome spare all those who found shelter in Christian Churches? Why did those same barbarians convert to such a beautiful religion afterwards?

But these same faults are present today. What you must do, as an observer, is separate the name from the actions and intentions. Most Catholics are peaceful, humble, charitable souls who attempt to present our religion with clarity and intelligence, through the Grace of God Almighty, so that we enlighten the lives of those whom we touch.

Just look at the parable of the wheat and the weeds given by Jesus Christ our Lord: every bountiful field has bad seeds. What you must do is distinguish between them. God bless.

2007-11-13 16:32:36 · answer #2 · answered by thisismattwade 2 · 0 2

Read the Documents of vatican II. You still have not read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You seem to know nothing about the Catholic Church today and its teachings. The Church is far from totalitarian

2007-11-14 13:12:01 · answer #3 · answered by James O 7 · 1 0

The Catholic church remains the world's oldest sovereign government, predating that of all the presently existing countries of the world, and for a thousand years after the fall of Rome, it was the Catholic church that governed the ancient (and very violent) world, when no other power on earth could do it.

The Catholic church has preserved one complete, consistent, divinely revealed sacred deposit of faith for these last 2000 years.

It's the Catholic church's God given duty and right to preserve the truth of God's Word, to make that truth available freely to all who seek it, and to defend it from all who would seek to destroy or profane it.

Sometimes, especially in ancient times, that meant war.

Check your old testament, as well as the history of the world, and you'll find a never ending battle going on between the forces of good and evil.

The mere fact that the Catholic church still exists (and thrives) in spite of all the corruption both inside and outside of it, is proof enough that Jesus wasn't kidding when he founded only one church, the Catholic church, and he promised to bless it and keep it, until the end of time, for the purpose of our salvation.

It's been almost 2000 years. That should have been plenty of time for most people to discern the facts of the matter.

What's stopping you?

2007-11-13 16:52:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

There you go with your religious fiction again. Please study what the Church teaches AND her CORRECT history, because this is getting stupid.

2007-11-15 02:00:17 · answer #5 · answered by Danny H 6 · 0 0

go to http://mostholyfamilymonastery.com

2007-11-16 11:07:08 · answer #6 · answered by IT 1 · 0 0

Clever chap that satan

2007-11-13 16:20:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Gal. 4:16

Unholy Mother of Intolerance: The Inquisition

Issue Date: January/February 1984

by Avro Manhattan

If Hitler should return and proclaim deep love for the Jews; or Stalin appear and declare himself a Capitalist, would we not take them with a largish pinch of salt? Well, then! Why should we react differently to a similar "phoney" conversion of an institution which has surpassed the evil of both these dictators?

Today the Catholic church claims heartfelt love for all those outside her. This is as incongruous as the claims of a repentant Hitler or Stalin. Indeed it would be laughably ridiculous if we were not dealing with tragic matters.

Her sudden desire to "embrace the separated brethren" is nothing but her latest device to make people forget the basic spirit of intolerance and fanaticism. That spirit is as alive as ever, ready to strike should the opportunity present itself.

All her actions in past centuries speak of nothing else. Her main excuse for intolerance makes strange logic: She is specifically charged by God to save the souls of all Christians. Since the killing of souls was worse than the killing of bodies, she reasoned, and since heretics used their bodies to kill souls, their bodies should pay for the sins of the wicked souls they housed.

Thanks to this Catholic logic, soon the ecclesiastical and temporal machineries of the Western world were enriched with the noble practice of judicial torture, expressly employed by Holy Mother Church for the suppression of heresy, later known as Protestantism.

In 1252 Pope Innocent IV issued Bull AS EXTIRPANDA. It became the classic in inquisitorial procedure. It provides:

that anyone may seize a heretic and despoil him of his property;
that every magistrate shall appoint an inquisitorial commission, whose salaries are to be paid by the State;
that no law may be passed interfering with these Inquisitors;
that heretics who will not confess their heresy shall be tortured;
that the confiscated property of heretics shall be thus divided: one-third to the Inquisitors and the bishops, one-third to the city, and one-third to those who aided in the arrest and conviction.

Pope Innocent gave precise instructions to all Inquisitors to enforce the regulations throughout Europe. Eventually it was made Statute Law. The regular clergy proved reluctant, so the popes turned to the most fanatical, intolerant and narrow-minded section of the Church structure, the sundry monastic orders.

The two which excelled in their infamous task were the Dominicans and the Franciscans. Armed with practically unlimited power from the popes, these Inquisitors swarmed all over Europe like theological hornets, setting up tribunals wherever they appeared.

Soon individuals, communities, nations, and indeed, the very hierarchy trembled at the mere mention of their names. Wherever they came, denunciations, accusation, treachery, perjury, torture, woe, and death resulted.

The hooded Inquisitors did not content themselves with establishing their court in the sundry lands of Europe. Pope Gregory IX appointed a Dominican Grand Inquisitor for the whole of Armenia and Russia. Pope Urban VI ordered the General of the Dominicans to appoint Inquisitors for Armenia, Greece and Tartary (China).

Pope Nicholas IV asked the Patriarch of Jerusalem to create Inquisitors from the mendicant friars in his land. Pope Gregory XI granted authority to the Franciscan Provincial in the Holy Land to act as Chief Inquisitor in Syria, Palestine and even Egypt.

When an Inquisitor arrived everybody was commanded, in obedience to the pope and to Mother Church, to disclose the name of anyone suspected of the slightest deviation from the Faith. The Inquisitors issued a compelling threat and a promise. A denouncer would get an indulgence of three years. Those avoiding their duty would be excommunicated.

Some denunciations were factual but many were concocted by vengeance, spite of jealousy. Those denounced, even on the flimsiest accusation or mere suspicion, would be arrested and flung directly into prison.

This usually was a common dungeon. Cold and damp, it lacked light or sanitation, and contained cut-throats, thieves, and the like. Among these the friars would plant spies to induce the accused, by pretended friendship, threats, or other methods, to admit his guilt.

If this first step proved insufficient, the suspected heretic would be chained with heavy irons and left to starve in a dark, foul hole called the durus carcer--"cruel prison." The accused was then brought before the inquisitorial tribunal composed of friars. If he asked the names of his accusers, he was told that only his judges had the right to know their names. He had no such right.

He was asked to confess to his guilt. If he pleaded innocence, he would be sent back to prison. On a second or third appearance before the Court, if he persisted he was put to torture. The whole purpose of his trial, of course, was to force a confession of heresy.

Torture was inflicted without solid proof of guilt. Two complainers or even one single accuser was sufficient for subjection to the agonies of torture, even if the accused man had, until then, been of unblemished character, pristine honesty and genuine piety.

The methods, kinds and degrees of torture were endless. The three basic ones employed were hoisting the man to the ceiling by his hands tied behind his back, breaking him on the rack, or greasing his feet and thrusting them into the fire.

If, following all the exquisite devices of torture, the heretic refused to recant or to admit his guilt, then the Inquisitors would pass capital sentence of heresy. Having done that, they would hand him over to the "secular arm," the civil authorities.

To complete the macabre farce, the Holy Inquisitors would ask these same temporal powers, in the name of the Church, not to kill the poor accused. This formality was a mere legalistic device to make the Church appear innocent of the blood which was about to be spilled--or rather, burned.

The civil authorities could not heed this hypocritical plea, however, lest the Holy Inquisition fall upon them. Refusal to burn the heretic would have placed the temporal authorities themselves on trial for their lives. For heresy, of course!

Soon no one was safe from potential arrest. The spying, denunciation, and hunting down of heretics reached cleric or lay, men or women, noble or common. No one was immune from the terrorizing omnipresence of the Holy Inquisition.

This reign of Catholic terror lasted for centuries. Hundreds of thousands of men, women, and yes, even children were murdered...burned alive at the stake. Simply because they dared to disagree with the Holy Catholic Church or with her popes.

This Catholic terror officially ended less than two hundred years ago. As recently as 1762 a Protestant pastor was condemned to death in France. Why? Simply because he was a Protestant! By whom? By the Catholic Church! Yes, by that same church which now pretends to love her "dear separated brethren."

Indeed, in Europe torture was still enforced by all the Tribunals of the Holy Inquisition until the last century, the pope being forced to abolish it only in 1816.

It was Napoleon, who entered Madrid in 1808, who was to abolish the Inquisition. When the Spanish Parliament in 1813 declared it incompatible with the Constitution, the Vatican protested. Super-Catholic Ferdinand VII restored it in 1814, with the full approval of the Church. The Holy Inquisition was finally suppressed by the Liberals in July, 1834.

Yes, SUPPRESSED. Was not this same spirit still alive in Croatia in 1942 when the Catholic Ustachi mutilated hundreds of thousands of Serbian "heretics?" Or in South Vietnam in 1960 when Catholic President Diem set out to rid that country of Buddhist "heretics?" Or in 1983 when Christmas shoppers in Protestant ("heretic") London were blasted into eternity by a Catholic IRA terrorist bomb in a crowded department store?

So the Office of the Holy Inquisition was abolished only as recently as last century. Let us never forget that the Catholic Church was forced to abolish it by a lay government. Yet it is still alive, a roaring lion gnashing at his cage bars still seeking whom he may devour.

Is it any coincidence that the present German pope is still referred to by his colleagues as "Der Panzerkardinal?"

2007-11-13 16:53:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

What do you mean the issue of control did not surface until the collapse of Rome? The head of the Catholic Church has never been in question. Jesus Christ is High Priest and, in so being, appointed the first of a long-line of stuarts to His Church here on earth.

The Authority of the Peter and, by extension, the popes, is Biblical:

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).

Matt. 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.

Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. No other man in Scripture is said to have the faith to walk on water. This faith ultimately did not fail.

Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus' tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ's representative on earth.

Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus' teachings.

Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus' curse on the fig tree.

Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.

Mark 16:7 - Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.

Luke 5:3 – Jesus teaches from Peter’s boat which is metaphor for the Church. Jesus guides Peter and the Church into all truth.

Luke 5:4,10 - Jesus instructs Peter to let down the nets for a catch, and the miraculous catch follows. Peter, the Pope, is the "fisher of men."

Luke 7:40-50- Jesus addresses Peter regarding the rule of forgiveness and Peter answers on behalf of the disciples. Jesus also singles Peter out and judges his conduct vis-à-vis the conduct of the woman who anointed Him.

Luke 8:45 - when Jesus asked who touched His garment, it is Peter who answers on behalf of the disciples.

Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14 - Peter is always mentioned before John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Luke 9:28;33 - Peter is mentioned first as going to mountain of transfiguration and the only one to speak at the transfiguration.

Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter's formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.

Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6 - John arrived at the tomb first but stopped and waited for Peter. Peter then arrived and entered the tomb first.

Luke 24:34 - the two disciples distinguish Peter even though they both had seen the risen Jesus the previous hour. See Luke 24:33.

John 6:68 - after the disciples leave, Peter is the first to speak and confess his belief in Christ after the Eucharistic discourse.

John 13:6-9 - Peter speaks out to the Lord in front of the apostles concerning the washing of feet.

John 13:36; 21:18 - Jesus predicts Peter's death. Peter was martyred at Rome in 67 A.D. Several hundred years of papal successors were also martyred.

John 21:2-3,11 - Peter leads the fishing and his net does not break. The boat (the "barque of Peter") is a metaphor for the Church.

John 21:7 - only Peter got out of the boat and ran to the shore to meet Jesus. Peter is the earthly shepherd leading us to God.

John 21:15 - in front of the apostles, Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus "more than these," which refers to the other apostles. Peter is the head of the apostolic see.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed my lambs," "tend my sheep," "feed my sheep." Sheep means all people, even the apostles.

Acts 1:13 - Peter is first when entering upper room after our Lord's ascension. The first Eucharist and Pentecost were given in this room.

Acts 1:15 - Peter initiates the selection of a successor to Judas right after Jesus ascended into heaven, and no one questions him. Further, if the Church needed a successor to Judas, wouldn't it need one to Peter? Of course.

Acts 2:14 - Peter is first to speak for the apostles after the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost. Peter is the first to preach the Gospel.

Acts 2:38 - Peter gives first preaching in the early Church on repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 3:1,3,4 - Peter is mentioned first as going to the Temple to pray.

Acts 3:6-7 - Peter works the first healing of the apostles.

Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12 - Peter teaches the early Church the healing through Jesus and that there is no salvation other than Christ.

Acts 5:3 - Peter declares the first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.

Acts 5:15 - Peter's shadow has healing power. No other apostle is said to have this power.

Acts 8:14 - Peter is mentioned first in conferring the sacrament of confirmation.

Acts 8:20-23 - Peter casts judgment on Simon's quest for gaining authority through the laying on of hands. Peter exercises his binding and loosing authority.

Acts 9:32-34 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and works the healing of Aeneas.

Acts 9:38-40 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and raises Tabitha from the dead.

Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.

Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18 - Peter is first to teach about salvation for all (Jews and Gentiles).

Acts 12:5 - this verse implies that the "whole Church" offered "earnest prayers" for Peter, their leader, during his imprisonment.

Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.

Acts 15:7-12 - Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the Church's first council at Jerusalem, and no one questions him. After Peter the Papa spoke, all were kept silent.

Acts 15:12 - only after Peter (the Pope) speaks do Paul and Barnabas (bishops) speak in support of Peter's definitive teaching.

Acts 15:13-14 - then James speaks to further acknowledge Peter's definitive teaching. "Simeon (Peter) has related how God first visited..."

Rom. 15:20 - Paul says he doesn't want to build on "another man's foundation" referring to Peter, who built the Church in Rome.

1 Cor. 9:5 – Peter is distinguished from the rest of the apostles and brethren of the Lord.

1 Cor. 15:4-8 - Paul distinguishes Jesus' post-resurrection appearances to Peter from those of the other apostles. Christ appeared “to Cephas, then to the twelve.”

Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ's Revelation to Paul.

1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by "exhorting" all the other bishops and elders of the Church.

1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from "Babylon" which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that "Babylon" meant Rome. Rome was the "great city" of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

2 Peter 1:14 - Peter writes about Jesus' prediction of Peter's death, embracing the eventual martyrdom that he would suffer.

2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul's letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock.

Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants.

2007-11-14 03:44:02 · answer #9 · answered by Daver 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers