Roman Catholicism and the total abuse & murder of children (incl. abortion).

You do realize that 'not being forced' to recant (ie go against conscience), does not hinder them (who are torturing the obstinate heretic as a means to regain them through coersive means, and have them bound) from still putting the 'obstinate heretic' to death, don't you? The one (obstinate heretic, acting according to conscience and carrying it out) put to death wasn't forced to become a catholic were they?

See how 'subtil' (Gen 3:1) Romanism is ... sounds so sweet in the ear ...

 

Therefore, since utilyan decided to quote Canon Law on conscience, and we see from that quotation that it does not prevent death to the obstinate heretic in the least, let's see what Romanism teaches about obstinate heretics and those excommunicate:

"... C. XLVII. Non sunt homicidae qui adversus excommunicatos zelo matris ecclesiae armantur ..."

“...They are not to be accounted murderers who, zealous for the mother church, have killed excommunicated persons. ...” [“The Decretum of Gratian Part 2 Case 23 Question 5 chapter 47-48”; Decreti Secunda Pars Causa XXIII. Quest. V. c. 47-49; [47,48 specifically; section 49 given in 'defense' of these actions/reasons]] –http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/collections/cul/texts/ldpd_6029936_001/pages/ldpd_6029936_001_00000531.html?toggle=image&menu=maximize&top=&left= AND http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/collections/cul/texts/ldpd_6029936_001/pages/ldpd_6029936_001_00000532.html?toggle=image&menu=maximize&top=&left=

See? They do not count obstinate heretics as innocent, neither do they account it murder to put them to death, just as Thomas Aquinas said.

Now let's look at Morality a little more:

[CCC] " …

ARTICLE 6
MORAL CONSCIENCE

IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct. ..." [Roman Catholic Catechism; Erroneous Judgment] - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P62.HTM

[CCC] " …

II. THE DEFINITION OF SIN

1849 Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as "an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law."121 ..." [Roman Catholic Catechism; Definition of Sin] - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6A.HTM

The Roman Catholic Church just previously defined what being in "right conscience" was in regards to "moral conduct"... and it includes accepting her "authority and her teaching" and thus also "reason" for it is the 'Pope's will that stands for (in the place of) reason (*) thus (pope) has the 'right conscience').

To not accept, or to reject her "authority and her teaching" is then a blatant violation [according to this system] of "right conscience" in "moral conduct", being a "desire contrary to the eternal law" [to be seen in more depth further in], injuring "human solidarity" ["common good"] and therefore is "sin" as defined by the Roman Catholic theological position which defines all things regarding "faith and morals".

By that definition then, any and all persons who are then continually and knowingly ["obstinate ill will"] in an open state of "denial" and/or "rejection" of the "faith" [Roman Catholicism] or in open knowing "denial" and/or "rejection" of the official doctrinal position given by Roman Pontiffs [popes] and/or Official Councils, is then for those persons to be in "mortal sin".

(*) "... The Pope has a heavenly arbitrament, and therefore he is able to change the nature of things, substantialia unius applicando alteri; and of nothing, to make things be; and of a sentence that is nothing, to make it stand in effect. The Pope's will stands for reason. He can dispense above the law; and of wrong make right, by correcting and changing laws. - Pope Nicholas, Dist. 96, Cap. Satis.-Dist. 12. Caus. 11. Quest. 1. Cap. Sacerdotibus.-Caus. 12. Quest. 1. Cap. Futuram. ..." - Illustrations of Popery, The Mystery of Iniquity unveiled ... by Chandler Curtis; page 210 - The mystery of iniquity unveiled

See also The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe, Volume 4, Part 1, 1856, by John Foxe (1516-1587), pgs. 159-160. - The acts and monuments of John Foxe

Pope Nicolaus, Dist. 96. c. 7 'Satis.' - Canon Law Collections | Pages

[Causa] 11. q. 41. 'Sacerdotibus.' - Canon Law Collections | Pages

[Causa] 12. q. l. ' Futurum.' - Canon Law Collections | Pages

 

Roman Catholic Catechism [Just War]

[CCC] " … 2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

- there must be serious prospects of success;

- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. the power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good. ..." [Roman Catholic Online Catechism; PART THREE: LIFE IN CHRIST; SECTION TWO THE TEN COMMANDMENTS; CHAPTER TWO YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF; Article 5 THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT; III. Safeguarding Peace] - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P81.HTM

Roman Catholic Catechism [Just War]

[CCC] " … 2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors. ..." [Roman Catholic Online Catechism; PART THREE: LIFE IN CHRIST; SECTION TWO THE TEN COMMANDMENTS; CHAPTER TWO YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF; Article 5 THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT; III. Safeguarding Peace] - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P81.HTM

Let it now be asked rhetorically, "What power on earth boldly declares that it determines what a "legitimate government" is?" It was also stated that, "… She forbade clerics to shed blood. …", but this was seen for what it is, in that "she" hides behind words and definitions of "her" own making, for those very "clerics" were most intimate in the oversight and direction of who, how, why, when, where and in what manner to "shed blood" [the very mind behind the actions themselves] and of various means of torture which did not involve methods to "shed blood". It was stated that, "… the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. …", yet it was shown that both "clemency" and "mercy" were only for those who "repented"/"recanted" thoroughly, and not for those [such as "heretics"] who remained in "obstinate ill will" toward "her", no longer being "innocent". "She" says in regards to the "practices" of "torture" that, "… It is necessary to work for their abolition. …", and "she" has been seen as meaning this in such a way as most will not begin to understand until they begin to think in "her" mindset, terms and rules/laws of engagement, for "she" actually means that they are to be abolished only when the world is converted to "her" way of thinking and teaching.

So, of course "she" looks forward to it, but such an ecumenical, or even realized unity with "her" is nothing to rejoice over. "She" then says very piously that, "… We must pray for the victims and their tormentors. …", and not only does this actually promote one false doctrine not found in scripture [the open ended idea of being able to pray for the past dead/deceased], it promotes even others still, such as the erroneous, false and dangerous theology of "purgatory". Roman Catholic Canon Law is itself "adopted" and derived itself from Emperor Justinian's Roman Law Code, and we see this in the Roman Catholic Church's "Tribunals". [["… So the immortal "Corpus Juris Civilis" was produced, consisting of four parts: (a) Digestae seu Pondecta, (b) Institutiones, (c) Codex, (d) Authenticum seu Novellae (an excellent account of its composition is found in Bury's Gibbon, ed. Cit., IV 461-510). It would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of this "Corpus". It is the basis of all canon law (ecclesia vivit lege romana), and the basis of civil law in every civilized country. …"; Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia; Justinian I] - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08578b.htm]

See for yourself:

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

Roman Catholicism sees obstinate heresy as a direct assault upon itself and the 'common good' as defined by the 'pope', whose will stands for reason, and right conscience.

Thus, eliminate the few holdouts to protect the empire. Sounds familiar, no?

Joh_11:50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

What was that about 'common good' utilyan and 'Legitimate defense'? The pharisees needed to protect themselves (Lies) from the onslaught of Jesus (Truth).

Even a Canonist agrees with me:

".. Catechism number 2266 (1997) went from two sections to one. Importantly, specific reference to the death penalty within the doctrinal statement cited above was removed. That statement was changed to read: “Legitimate public authority has the right and the duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense.” This new statement does not prohibit the use of the death penalty, but emphasized the need to consider proportionate punishment. It remained a doctrinal statement, but expressed differently. ...

... Keeping in mind that the Catechism is a systematic summary of teaching, we must view the change within the context of nos. 2263-2266, his 2017 private audience, and perennial teachings on conscience and the dignity of man. When we do this, we understand that the death penalty is “inadmissible” as a punishment when a deadly criminal can be kept safely locked up without fear of break-out; when there is hope for redemption as in the case of Cain; when a despot uses the punishment unjustly; when society has the means to rehabilitate and the person is willing to be rehabilitated; when there are less extreme means to legitimately defend others. In other words, he changed words without changing doctrine or discipline. ..." - https://cuf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/18-09-24-Capital-Punishment-Catechism-Statement.pdf

Read another here - Okay, what about Catholics and the death penalty?

 

"...David of Augsburg (cf. Preger, "Der Traktat des David von Augshurg uber die Waldenser", Munich, 1878 pp. 43 sqq.) pointed out to the inquisitor four methods of extracting open acknowledgment:

… fear of death, i.e. by giving the accused to understand that the stake awaited him if he would not confess; ...

… more or less close confinement, possibly emphasized by curtailment of food; ...

… visits of tried men, who would attempt to induce free confession through friendly persuasion; ...

… torture, which will be discussed below. …

... Had this papal legislation been adhered to in practice, the historian of the Inquisition would have fewer difficulties to satisfy. In the beginning, torture was held to be so odious that clerics were forbidden to be present under pain of irregularity. Sometimes it had to be interrupted so as to enable the inquisitor to continue his examination, which, of course, was attended by numerous inconveniences. Therefore on 27 April, 1260, Alexander IV authorized inquisitors to absolve one another of this irregularity. Urban IV on 2 August, 1262, renewed the permission, and this was soon interpreted as formal licence to continue the examination in the torture chamber itself. The inquisitors manuals faithfully noted and approved this usage. The general rule ran that torture was to be resorted to only once. But this was sometimes circumvented — first, by assuming that with every new piece of evidence the rack could be utilized afresh, and secondly, by imposing fresh torments on the poor victim (often on different days), not by way of repetition, but as a continuation (non ad modum iterationis sed continuationis), as defended by Eymeric; "quia, iterari non debent [tormenta], nisi novis supervenitibus indiciis, continuari non prohibentur."..." [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia; Inquisition] - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

["fewer difficulties to satisfy"? ["she" openly admits that there is such a past, and stretches "her" mind to explain "her" methods satisfactorily, with "reason", even in the light of all available evidence], "numerous inconveniences"?, "absolve one another of this irregularity"? ["irregularity" is speaking of that which is defined and written in Canon Law] ...and why "odious"?, obviously not because of concern for the living being tortured, maimed or about to be burned, killed, but for their own "sanctity", for their own "purity" so that they [priests, etc] would not incur, what they term "irregularity", which they later could simply "absolve" their ownselves of, by Papal authorization, which means the Pope knew exactly what was going on. [see also, "Ad Extirpanda", "Inquisitors" are "commissioned by the Apostolic See" and are "obtained" from the "Apostolic See".

"...torture...was first authorized by Innocent IV in his Bull "Ad exstirpanda" of 15 May, 1252, which was confirmed by Alexander IV on 30 November, 1259, and by Clement IV on 3 November, 1265. ..." [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia; Inquisition] - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

Do you want me to quote Ad Extripanda? I can ...

Extirpanda; translated into English; Pope Innocent IV; for further notation and Latin text, please follow the Link provided] - http://www.scribd.com/doc/23292309/Ad-Extirpanda-Pope-Innocent-IV-1252

 

Right back to square one utilyan, its all in the matter of how Romanism defined 'innocent'. Obstinate heretics aren't 'innocent', they're 'guilty' of 'mortal sin', according to Rome a deadly 'contagion', likened unto rabies in catholic literature, that needs to be put down so as not to infect the rest of the catholic faithful.

"Summa Theologica: Article 3. Whether heretics ought to be tolerated? ..."

"… I answer that, With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death. ..."

"...On the part of the Church, however, there is mercy which looks to the conversion of the wanderer, wherefore she condemns not at once, but "after the first and second admonition," as the Apostle directs: after that, if he is yet stubborn, the Church no longer hoping for his conversion, looks to the salvation of others, by excommunicating him and separating him from the Church, and furthermore delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death. ..."

"...Yet if heretics be altogether uprooted by death, this is not contrary to Our Lord's command ..."

"...For this reason the Church not only admits to Penance those who return from heresy for the first time, but also safeguards their lives, and sometimes by dispensation, restores them to the ecclesiastical dignities which they may have had before, should their conversion appear to be sincere: we read of this as having frequently been done for the good of peace. But when they fall again, after having been received, this seems to prove them to be inconstant in faith, wherefore when they return again, they are admitted to Penance, but are not delivered from the pain of death. ..."

"...Reply to Objection 1. In God's tribunal, those who return are always received, because God is a searcher of hearts, and knows those who return in sincerity. But the Church cannot imitate God in this, for she presumes that those who relapse after being once received, are not sincere in their return; hence she does not debar them from the way of salvation, but neither does she protect them from the sentence of death. …" [Summa Theologica The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas
Second and Revised Edition, 1920
Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province
Online Edition Copyright © 2008 by Kevin Knight
Nihil Obstat. F. Innocentius Apap, O.P., S.T.M., Censor. Theol.
Imprimatur. Edus. Canonicus Surmont, Vicarius Generalis. Westmonasterii.
APPROBATIRDINIS
Nihil Obstat. F. Raphael Moss, O.P., S.T.L. and F. Leo Moore, O.P., S.T.L.
Imprimatur. F. Beda Jarrett, O.P., S.T.L., A.M., Prior Provincialis Angliæ
MARIÆ IMMACULATÆ - SEDI SAPIENTIÆ] - http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3011.htm

"...Like other powers and rights, the power of rejecting heresy adapts itself in practice to circumstances of time and place, and, especially, of social and political conditions. ...

"...The ancient discipline charged the bishops with the duty of searching out the heresies in their diocese and checking the progress of error by any means at their command. ..."

"...In some particularly aggravated cases sentence of death was pronounced upon heretics..."

"...The Synod of Verona (1184) imposed on bishops the duty to search out the heretics in their dioceses and to hand them over to the secular power. Other synods, and the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) under Pope Innocent III, repeated and enforced this decree, especially the Synod of Toulouse (1229), which established inquisitors in every parish (one priest and two laymen). ..."

"...The present-day legislation against heresy has lost nothing of its ancient severity; but the penalties on heretics are now only of the spiritual order; all the punishments which require the intervention of the secular arm have fallen into abeyance. ..."

"...To restrain and bring back her rebellious sons the Church uses both her own spiritual power and the secular power at her command. ..." [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia; Heresy] - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm#REF_VIII

 

Rev_3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

Rev_2:6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Rev_2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

Psa_119:104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.

Psa_119:128 Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way.

Please notice, that God hates, the 'deed', and the 'doctrine' and 'every false way', but loves the person enough to tell them to repent. Thus I follow Jesus Christ who spoke, Who do you follow?

'unicorns' are simply rhinos (uni-cornis, or bi-cornis), and 'cockatrices' are poisonous vipers.

 

Not the point of this thread. It is simply informational dissemination. That which converts is to behold Christ Jesus lifted up on the cross, suffering, bleeding, dying, bearing the weight of all of our sins, having the Father turn away His face from Him, and the Holy Ghost silent, and all the heavenly angels turning away, and man having forsaken Him, so that He was all "alone" and "by Himself". How precious is the one who first loved us, how good and merciful and faithful and loving is Jesus to have gone through all of the way of suffering, that we might have a path to follow and be reunited with Him forever and ever. Do you see Jesus lifted up in the minds eye, can you see Him looking down at you, can you hear His words spoken? Can you see the evil that surrounded Him on every side, seen and unseen (evil angels and the devil himself)? Can you see the cruelty of man and devil compared and contrasted with the goodness of God upon the Cross? Can you see how thirsty He is? Can you see the life draining from Him, breath by breath, slowing and slower still? Can you hear His words, "Father forgive them ...", can you hear those words for you, that no man may take from you? Do you hear His prayer to the Father on your behalf? Can you see Him finally still, no longer moving, no longer breathing, cold, lifeless, limp, dead, emaciated, all poured out? Can you see the rough hands that handle Him in removing Him? Can you see Him shut away in the cold, damp, dark, tomb, sealed away by a rock? Do you see the women weeping? Do you see Joseph and Nicodemus holding back the tears to prepare Him gently for rest? Where is the voice that for so many years gave comfort to those in need, to those in heartache and pain? Where is the hands that touched and healed thousands? All now still, wrapped together, laid in the tomb for your sins and my sins, and the sins of the whole world. ... but don't stop there, behold the angel Gabriel sent from the Father, clothed in the glorious office of Heaven, coming down, shaking the earth with mighty power direct from the throne of Deity, scattering all the darkness, rolling back the stone of the tomb triumphantly and sitting upon it, calling to the Son of God, "Come forth, Thy Father calleth thee", and the power of God witnessed in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, "I am the resurrection and the Life".

Mine. All mine. Is any of that yours Adonia? or do you need something more?

 

I didn't lie, and the quotation, whether full or ellipsed says the same. It is only for "innocent", thus for the 'innocent" it "is against moral Law". it says nothing about the 'guilty'. Thus anyone not innocent, it does not apply to as per themselves.

Did the pope and Romanism ever sanction "torture" utilyan? I can quote even Canon lawyers on this. I can cite history on this utilyan. Crusades, Inquistions, Bartholomew's Day Massacre, Waldensian persecution, crushing of Zwingli, Revolutions (Russian, France, Cuba, Italy, etc), to the modern day.

 

The entire 'system' is corrupt. Yes, one may have 'hatred' for evil and all its repugnance and odiousness, deeds and doctrines which blaspheme Jesus Christ, but Jesus died for the sinner.