John Hagee and Catholics

[CarpentersApprentice]

Has he changed his ways?

John Hagee's May 12, 2008 letter to Bill Donohue of the the Catholic League:
http://www.catholicleague.org/images/upload/image_200805130112.Donohue051208.pdf

Your thoughts?

CA

 

[YellowHammer]

John Hagee

Maybe he finally found Jesus.

 

[Bro. James]

Maybe he has joined the growing ranks of ecumenicals going back to Rome, which is still a masterpiece--of deception. Preach that and see how your attendance changes.

Will Jesus find The Faith when He returns?

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

[D28guy]

I dont think he is "going back to Rome" or anything. I believe he is just "fine tuning" his stance.

All of us who understand the truth about the Catholic false gospel acknowledge that *some* Catholics can indeed stumble upon saving faith while in the church of Rome.

Mike

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

It seems there is also a "former Southern Baptist" angle to the story.

CA

 

[JFox1]

John Hagee was virulently anti-Catholic. I read his book, "In Defense of Israel," in which he blames the early church fathers, the Roman Catholic Church, Martin Luther, and others for the spread of anti-Semitism. The book even went to so far as to insinuate that Hitler's persecution of the Jews was in line with church policy. Adolf was simply being a "good" Catholic.

Among the heretical statements Hagee made in that book was that Jesus didn't come as the Messiah. Oh, yes He did (John 4:25-26). :BangHead:

Therefore, I'm a little skeptical. I think Hagee denounced his anti-Catholic statements for political reasons.

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

Deal Hudson is the former Southern Baptist who, apparently in part at least, influenced John Hagee to clarify his opinion about Catholics:

Meeting Reverend John Hagee by Deal W. Hudson

From the article:

I asked him, "Are you saying the Catholic Church cannot be the 'Great Whore' because the 'Great Whore' exists only during the period of tribulation?" Hagee answered, "Yes, anyone who is a real Christian, Catholic or Protestant, has been taken to heaven, only those without faith, including Catholics and Protestants, are left behind."

CA

 

[BobRyan]

Pretty amazing that this Southern Baptist turned-Catholic was so influential in getting Hagee to change his tune.

Also of interest was Hagee's statement in the letter that the slaughter of Jews and saints in the Dark Ages by the RCC using it's "extermination policy" that was codefied into law in Lateran IV -- "does not define the Catholic church".

That is pretty amazing! A law that the RCC STILL does not repudiate -- calling for EXTERMINATION of Jews and heretics (read saints who oppose the RCC's false doctrines) -- a law that they STILL hold to be infallible -- "does not define them".

How "instructive".

How instructive that the GOP and Hagee find much more to be "gained" in joint operation and cooperation between Catholics and Evangelicals than the good it might do to remind people of the CURRENT position of the RCC in UPHOLDING those "extermination" laws - by continuing to claim them as infallible in morals and doctrine.


The world nears it's end.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Matt Black]

I suspect it is more a spiritual version of 'my enemy's enemy is my friend' (on eg: abortion, homosexuality) realpolitik, rather than any kind of theological convergence

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Pretty amazing that this Southern Baptist turned-Catholic was so influential in getting Hagee to change his tune.

Also of interest was Hagee's statement in the letter that the slaughter of Jews and saints in the Dark Ages by the RCC using it's "extermination policy" that was codefied into law in Lateran IV -- "does not define the Catholic church".

That is pretty amazing! A law that the RCC STILL does not repudiate -- calling for EXTERMINATION of Jews and heretics (read saints who oppose the RCC's false doctrines) -- a law that they STILL hold to be infallible -- "does not define them".

How "instructive".

How instructive that the GOP and Hagee find much more to be "gained" in joint operation and cooperation between Catholics and Evangelicals than the good it might do to remind people of the CURRENT position of the RCC in UPHOLDING those "extermination" laws - by continuing to claim them as infallible in morals and doctrine.


The world nears it's end.

in Christ,

Bob

Have you read the fourth Lateran Council? I didn't see anywhere where it says to exterminate Jews. It did give a discource on ridding themselves of heretics but not to exterminate them.

We strictly ordain that if any such person, after he has been designated as excommunicated, refuses to render satisfaction within a year, then by the law itself he shall be branded as infamous and not be admitted to public offices or councils or to elect others to the same or to give testimony. He shall be intestable, that is he shall not have the freedom to make a will nor shall succeed to an inheritance. Moreover nobody shall be compelled to answer to him on any business whatever, but he may be compelled to answer to them. If he is a judge sentences pronounced by him shall have no force and cases may not be brought before him; if an advocate, he may not be allowed to defend anyone; if a notary, documents drawn up by him shall be worthless and condemned along with their condemned author; and in similar matters we order the same to be observed

Dosen't sound like any killing going on here.

Also as far as Jews go in the council

The more the christian religion is restrained from usurious practices, so much the more does the perfidy of the Jews grow in these matters, so that within a short time they are exhausting the resources of Christians. Wishing therefore to see that Christians are not savagely oppressed by Jews in this matter, we ordain by this synodal decree that if Jews in future, on any pretext, extort oppressive and excessive interest from Christians, then they are to be removed from contact with Christians until they have made adequate satisfaction for the immoderate burden. Christians too, if need be, shall be compelled by ecclesiastical censure, without the possibility of an appeal, to abstain from commerce with them. We enjoin upon princes not to be hostile to Christians on this account, but rather to be zealous in restraining Jews from so great oppression. We decree, under the same penalty, that Jews shall be compelled to make satisfaction to churches for tithes and offerings due to the churches, which the churches were accustomed to receive from Christians for houses and other possessions, before they passed by whatever title to the Jews, so that the churches may thus be preserved from loss.

Sounds more like preventing high interest rates. Also Jews could not hold public office. So what then are you talking about with the whole extermination thing?

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

Perhaps Bob's reference is to this... {The formatting is mine.}

"We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith... condemning all heretics... Those condemned, being handed over to the secular rulers of their bailiffs... Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall... exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church...

"But if a temporal ruler... should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated... If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action.

"The same law is to be observed in regard to those who have no chief rulers... Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land."

Extract from Twelfth Ecumenical Council: Lateran IV 1215. Canon 3.

So... is Hagee unaware of this?

CA

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Perhaps Bob's reference is to this... {The formatting is mine.}

"We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith... condemning all heretics... Those condemned, being handed over to the secular rulers of their bailiffs... Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall... exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church...

"But if a temporal ruler... should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated... If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action.

"The same law is to be observed in regard to those who have no chief rulers... Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land."

Extract from Twelfth Ecumenical Council: Lateran IV 1215. Canon 3.

So... is Hagee unaware of this?

CA

I guess its a matter of translation. Where you've "quoted" exterminate, the version I read is expel from the land. Two different connotations. However, how different is that from what the puritans did in england to the catholics during their civil war which lead to the rule of Oliver Cromwell? Or an anabaptist leader in germany saying that he can marry multiple wives. Or even Southern Baptist Leaders during the American Civil War promoting Slavery (and I dare say I've heard the pulpit still say that slavery was a good thing though this is rare and usually in a backwards church) I'm not defending catholics but Hagee dosen't have a superior history to the Catholic Church either.

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

I guess its a matter of translation. Where you've "quoted" exterminate, the version I read is expel from the land. Two different connotations...

Two different connotations to be sure!

My original citation was taken from the Medieval Sourcebook. I hunted around and found another source: All Catholic Church Ecumenical Councils.

According to this second source the word is, as you say, "expel" (... to expel from the lands... after they have expelled the heretics... for the expulsion of heretics...)

It seems that the word "exterminate" may have had a different meaning in 1215. In any event, it does appear that there is some difference of opinion as to the correct translation so it would, I think, be prudent not to read too much into the word.

CA

 

[D28guy]

"I guess its a matter of translation. Where you've "quoted" exterminate, the version I read is expel from the land. Two different connotations."

Ummmm....we have the pages of history at our disposal, you know.

And they are replete with bloody proof that the Catholic Church is very much capable of the type of "exterminate" that has much more than "expel from the land" as its outcome.

Millions of individual proofs.

Sadly,

Mike

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Ummmm....we have the pages of history at our disposal, you know.

And they are replete with bloody proof that the Catholic Church is very much capable of the type of "exterminate" that has much more than "expel from the land" as its outcome.

Millions of individual proofs.

Sadly,

Mike

And so were the protestants. This is true.

 

[BobRyan]

Perhaps Bob's reference is to this... {The formatting is mine.}

"We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith... condemning all heretics... Those condemned, being handed over to the secular rulers of their bailiffs... Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall... exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church...

"But if a temporal ruler... should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated... If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action.

"The same law is to be observed in regard to those who have no chief rulers... Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land."

Extract from Twelfth Ecumenical Council: Lateran IV 1215. Canon 3.

So... is Hagee unaware of this?

CA

I guess its a matter of translation. Where you've "quoted" exterminate, the version I read is expel from the land. Two different connotations.

The actual latin word is "EXTERMINARE" and applies to both death and banishment.

However, how different is that from what the puritans did in england to the catholics during their civil war which lead to the rule of Oliver Cromwell?

The RC argument is that they control the church and the state and that people by Canon Law MUST exterminate (exterminare) the heretics.

Any civil authority who refused to comply lost his job.

The RCC argument STILL TODAY is that even at that time -- it's canon laws were infallible that it never strayed from infallibility in all matters of faith and practice.

IF you are arguing that the Puritans today claim to have acted infallibily in all their dealing with Catholics in the past - please provide that evidence.

Or an anabaptist leader in germany saying that he can marry multiple wives.

That is equivocation to argue that "if there exists an anabaptist that maried multiple wives then for century upon century the RCC can also engaged in the extermination of those who oppose it AND claim still today infallibility for such statements in Canon Law" then I have yet to see the argument made in "proofs".

Or even Southern Baptist Leaders during the American Civil War promoting Slavery (and I dare say I've heard the pulpit still say that slavery was a good thing though this is rare and usually in a backwards church) I'm not defending catholics but Hagee dosen't have a superior history to the Catholic Church either.

ALL of these groups have a "superior" history to the century upon century of inquisition, torture and killing of dissenters -- in the millions by their own account. AND the subsequent "Our laws at that time were infallible in terms of morals and doctrine" when in fact their laws called for "Extermination".

If the Southern Baptist organization were to claim to day that it's pronouncements in the 1800's regarding African's were "infallible statemens on doctrine and morals" - then in one small sliver of time you MIGHT have had an argument to equivocate with the RCC. They do not make such claims so don't know where you get that.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

The actual latin word is "EXTERMINARE" and applies to both death and banishment.

Thanks for pointing this out. Do you have any sort of dictionary reference? (An on-line one would be great!)

The RCC argument STILL TODAY is that even at that time -- it's canon laws were infallible that it never strayed from infallibility in all matters of faith and practice.

(I think it's faith and morals, not faith and practice.) But, in any event, I thought Catholic Canon Laws could change? I'll hunt around a little and see what I come up with.

CA