The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum RCC

Hitch

As Pilgrim indicated the fact that in the past the RCC persecuted Christians is not under dispute. However, I would like the say that Protestants are not immune to doing the very same thing even to other Protestants.

One needs only to look at the life of Reformed Baptist John Bunyan to see the truth of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bunyan


The important thing is not the past, but the present and the RCC is no longer persecuting Christians.

The RCC has enough things wrong with it today, without bringing up past sins that are no longer occurring.

I would also like to add that much of the Protestant Church today, has almost nothing in common with the historical Protestant Church and that isn't a good thing.
But I digress, I have strayed off topic.

Tom

The present is tied to the past in this case by the twisted wire of papal/church infallibility. Im sure the RCC would prefer we pretend this docrtine doesnt matter but when there's an elephant in the room there will be leavings. If at some point in history it was official, therefore infallible, papal-church sanctioned policy and to persecute anyone for possesing or reading the scriptures (or a host of other crimes) the question of why this is no longer practiced is valid. Since the RCC is free to publically proclim her supposed infallibilty she can and will be called to publically defend her teachings and practices. The claim of infallibility renders the whole notion of 'past sins' moot.

The claim will be made that we (I if you prefer) simply fail to understand their version of infallibility and its applications. This usually follows responses to question designed to deflect and change the focus of the discussion, we already have that here. Next comes demonization, after that sliencing then elimination. After all when you're infallible you can hardly admit a mistake.

.
This pattern probably wont mature here because of who is in charge but it would otherwise.

None of this makes Via Delorosa responsible for problems associated with the RCC and every Catholoic shouldnt be hounded for answers, but this is a free forum and as above I believe the questions are valid.

H

Hitch

Now I am confused, was not the topic of conversation persecution by the RCC?

Yes the RCC does believe in papal infallibility, but it no longer comes out in the form of persecution in the manner it once did.
I believe however, that in order to make valid arguments against such doctrines, we should at least properly represent it.
Papal infallibility basically is the notion that the RCC allows the office of the Pope to be the ruling agent in deciding the beliefs of the Church.
These pronouncements by the pope are known as solemn papal definitions or ex cathedra teachings. This does not mean that the pope is excempt from the liability of sin.
I would argue that seeing how many of these doctrinal heresies came via the popes, then they are liable to God for these heretical sins.
However, a RC would probably counter that seeing how the popes make these doctrines "ex cathedra", then they can not be heretical because they come from God Himself.
But then again, I believe in Sola-scriptura and do not believe that RCC tradition (to put it mildly) is on par with Scripture.

There are many great articles on the Highway that touch on this subject, such as here and here .

These articles deal with very important subjects and show the heretical teaching of the RCC on these matters.
You seemed to accuse me of distracting away from the guilt of the RCC, yet I assure you that I am definitely not distracting away from their guilt in many areas. But, what I said before stands.

I find that when man has power, they often misuse it and sometimes it comes in the form of persecution. But this is not something that is unique to the RCC; it is something that is common within all depraved man.
Unfortunately it even comes out from time to time within true believers, who allow sinful thoughts to come to fruition in their actions.

Tom

Specially persecution involving owning/reading the scriptures That is the point Tom . Now when those beliefs, condoned by the pope, include the burning of Tyndale, beneath the umbrella of infallibility, there is a problem. If Pope Infallible X says burn Tyndale it is by definition the will of God and can be niether sin nor mistake, correct? That Pope Infalliable did not personally give the order makes no difference. If this action was wrong,in the eyes of God, then Pope Infallible X sinned, but more importantly infallibilty is shown for the fraud it is. Yes? Of course we have plenty of our own troubles but we have nothing that compares with papal/church infallibility. We have a far easier time admitting mistakes.

I couldnt remember this part from the first time through LOL . This is the whole or most of your edit right?

It very well supports and confirms my point, unless I misunderstand. copied as post script.


H

tip; dont try to catch the snowflakes on your tongue.


ps;
If Pope Infallible X says burn Tyndale it is by definition the will of God and can be niether sin nor mistake, correct? That Pope Infalliable did not personally give the order makes no difference. If this action was wrong,in the eyes of God, then Pope Infallible X sinned, but more importantly infallibilty is shown for the fraud it is. Yes?

Hitch


Sorry you missed my edit, I think it was done with in about 5 minutes after I originally posted.



It is not under dispute (in my eyes) that the RCC did in the past sin by persecuting people such as Tyndale. One might even make the argument that they also sinned by claiming that God indirectly ordered these persecutions. Though, I would need to do more research to know for sure.
The RCC will answer for their past sins, which includes sins done via ex-cathedra.
However, I would like to borrow a quote from Pilgrim that captures my feeling quite accurately.


The RCC no longer persecutes people and they also allow the laity to own and read Bibles.
The pope still operates ex-cathedra as his statement that declared that Protestant denominations are not true churches and that the RCC is the only true Church. This can be seen here .

I was actually fairly pleased that the current pope said this, mainly because the previous pope often seemed more inclusive when it came to the Church as a whole.
The current pope’s language is actually not as deceptive as the previous pope and therefore one isn’t as easily deceived.

The bottom line is let’s concern ourselves with false doctrines that the RCC still holds, such as ex-cathedra (without persecution) and the doctrine of justification.

Tom

Tom, you would agree that papal/church infallibity is a currently held false doctrine of the RCC?

This thread started with a request for information on a claim that the RCC persecuted lay persons for owning Bibles. I can offer no rebuttal out of absence. Since there has been nothing offered to substantiate this claim, the Catholic on this forum has been given nothing to respond to.