RCC kills everyone in Europe

I thank God I do not think like you in these regards, Bob. </font>[/QUOTE]Grant,

If I were a betting man I would say that this is the true heart of Bob's anti-catholicism. Likely he has used birth-control in his life and rather than repent of it has to attack the Catholic Church to justify it.

Ed.

Your right. I let myself get sucked in again. I repent of my folly.

 

It was "SDA pastors" that were killed in that case.

If you actually "read" the article you will "see" that the "ONE" SDA pastor/leader is the ONE 75 year old man who AIDED the monsters by not offering more HELP to the SDA PASTOR that wrote him saying that THEY would be killed if someone did not help them.

HE (the ONE 75 year old) wrote back to them "There is nothing I can do" - SEE the article. HE was AIDING the bad guys - but HE was not the one CAPABLE of much by way of physcial violence - his crime was in the AID.

So EVEN though we have SDA pastors and their congregations being killed "As the article reports" - STILL the SDA denomination's approach is to PUBLISH the LINK I gave - showing an APOLOGY for the ONE 75 year old who had a connection to local SDA leadership in that part of RUWANDA.

The "loss" was in the huge slaughter - which included many SDA pastors and members being killed according to the article published by those who attempted to attack the SDA church over this on "that other thread".

In your "trying to understand" you seem to have missed the entire content of that article.

In christ,

Bob

 

When you read your RCC defense for its actions in the dark ages CAN you really say ...

No attempt was made to "demonize the victims".

No attempt was made to "defend the evil doers".

No attempt was made to "rationalize for torture, slaughter and inhumane treatment".

No attempt was made to "avoid the specific apology".

No attempt was made to "contrast real Christian doctrine with the actions of evil doers".

No attempt was made to cover darness with light. To call "evil good".

Then when contrasted with the actions of other Christian groups regarding EVEN as case such as the one in RuWANDA - what was the PUBLISHED statement? Did it follow the RC course of demonizing the victims?

Demonizing the SDA pastors and church members killed in the slaughter?

Go see the quote if you are still even "pretending" to have an interest.

And soooooooo.

I offer again - come on over "to the light". Where you are "free" to call evil - a sin EVEN if it is done by ONE 75 year old man - whose "aid" is in question - aiding the "evil doers".

And also EVEN if it is the slaughter of millions
by armies of armed men - as is the case of the RCC in the dark ages. EVEN then - we are free to call "extermination -- evil" and "slauther -- evil" and we find no need to "spread light over the evil deeds".

You will be free in the light.

Come on over.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Recall that when Popes called each other antichrist (long before Luther did) and they got Catholics to killing Catholics - the RCC response is to "demonize the losers".

How tragic.

In Christ,

Bob

 

From the article that Bob claims to have read:

"The members of the U.N. tribunal were unanimous in convicting the Ntakirutimanas of “herding large groups of Tutsi men, women and children into a (Seventh-day Adventist) church and hospital compound in the Kibuye region of western Rwanda in 1994 and then calling Hutus to come and kill them."

The only one calling his aid in question is you, Bob.

The only one making excuses for this is you, Bob.

The only one defending the evil doers here is you, Bob.

This thread was your opportunity to show us how scandal such as this should be handled.

You have been most vocal in your criticism of others, and this was your chance to walk the talk.

You have failed.

I am very disappointed.

 

I am dissappointed in the RC attempts to obfuscate and duck the point - as well as equivocating and misrepresenting the facts. Hard to believe someone would still be following such revisionist historties - even today.

[QB] Here is what the SDAs are publishing to the world on this incident

http://www.adventist.org/news/data/2003/01/1045672278/index.html.en

That apology is from the "denomination" not just my own statement and it is published world wide.

Though THEY are the ones with THEIR pastors and church members being killed and THEY do not support the monsters doing the killing (monsters that included some SDA members, some Catholics some ...) yet THEY DO apologize.

I know this is hard for some RC posters to read - when they are "seeking" the opportunity to "equivocate" the RC armies killing fellow Catholics and killing of Christians for centuries - but try just reading the statements above and "contrasting it" to the RCC's actions in the dark ages.


In Christ,

Bob

 

Notice that in the perfidity of the anti-SDA authors that seek "anyone in the Ruwanda tribes that happens to be an SDA" as their "excuse" to bash - and then the RC members efforts to "equivocate" that to the actions of the RCC itself in the dark ages -

there is NO corresponding action by SDA authors to charge the RCC with catholic-killing-catholic crimes in the case of massive events - like WWII and German Catholics vs Allied Catholics killing each other.

The REASON that SDAs don't make the claim "yes but some of those Ruwandans doing the killing were ALSO Catholic... or yes but the germans were catholic soldiers" is because it is NOT a case of attacking the RCC just because some members of an army happen to be Catholics. (As in the case of the perfidity of those attacking SDAs here).

RATHER - the point SDAs raise about the RCC in the dark ages is INSTITUTIONALIZED slaughter, torture and murder that IS defended AS WE SEE IT also defended on this forum by Catholics.

INSTITUTIONALIZED atrocities for which the RCC according to Dr. Carroll DOES NOT apologize.

This is a simple concept - and I understand the "need" of the RCC posters to obfuscate and duck the point --

But I also appreciate the repeated opportunity to - highlight it. The "contrast" is "instructive".




In Christ,

Bob

 

From the link initially posted as an attack on Adventists (http://www.christiancommunitychurch.us/dovenet/sdasla2.htm)

we find the following information



According to a special Adventist World Report released in December 1994, at least 3,000 people died in the slaughter at Mugunaro, and close to 1,000 were killed at the Adventist university in Gitwe. In addition to accusations that certain Adventists aided the killers in both places, there is also evidence that Adventists risked their lives to save others.

(Seventh-day) Adventists are not the only religious figures accused of participating in the genocide. In a country estimated to be 90 percent Christian, many professed Christians and their church leaders were involved in the killing. Priests, nuns, and pastors of various faiths have been accused of crimes, including providing names of Tutsis and Hutu moderates to be eliminated. Clergy even betrayed the hiding places of people fleeing death.

We also find this interesting statement --

."
The Adventist Church is one of many church organizations that experienced serious administrative problems during the 1994 crisis. Many churches expressed great concern that their members were involved in the killings. "There is] absolutely no doubt that significant numbers of prominent Christians in parishes were involved .., Catholics, Anglicans, and Baptists [were] implicated by omission or commission in militia killings," says Ian Linden, general secretary of the Catholic Institute for International Relations. As spokesperson for the Catholic Church, Linden assumes some responsibility for dealing with the crisis. "The danger is [in assuming] an apologetic role and, by seeking explanation inadvertently to excuse. "

Those attempting to obfuscate, equivocate and duck the salient points of this debate - would totally "ignore" these facts - in their attempts at revisionism.

However - as already stated - the "point" is not that an army/mob had-some-Catholics doing the killing or had some-any-denomination-you-name - rather the "point" of this thread is "INSTUTIONALIZED" torture, inquisition, slaughter without any apology EVEN today.

Rather CONTINUED defense of the slaughter and demonizing of the victims as we SEE on this thread.

Of course - equivocating THOSE actions of the dark ages with this event in Ruwanda - while trying to hide the part of other Christian groups - is "needed" if one is to divert and misdirect attention AWAY from the RCC in he Dark Ages - so it is "understood" as to why the RC posters "need" to do it.

But still, dissappointing.

In Christ,

Bob

 

That you do not understand the "point" of this thread may explain why YOU are always "in left field".

 

Trying,

I suggest you just back off. Brick walls don't give, if you know what I mean.

And Bob, it's time to wake up.

 

The "amazing thing" is that the RC response is onlyh to "defend the torture and murders of the RCC in the dark ages" and as Dr. Carroll pointed out to "refuse to apologize for ANY specific incident".

The CONTRAST given here SHOWS a case where 10,000 Adventists were slaughtered on one side and FOUR SDA defendants were accused with being in some way connected to the monsters that did the killing. (as your own quoted sources state)

The published conclusion of the court is that there was not enough evidence to convict two of the four as already shown..

But STILL the Adventist position is to publish an appology for the few people who were in any way connected to the Adventists in Ruwanda that were in the wrong. (as has been shown)

EVEN though the public media document and the one quoted by anti-SDA sources states clearly that 90% of the population doing the killing had other Christian affiliation (And even gave cases of errors among several of those other demoniations) the Adventists STILL apologize by CONTRAST to the RC tac - in the Dark Ages.

The attempts to equivocate by the RCC members here - have failed in the same way as their revisionist history "attempts" have failed.

CathConvert has on this thread "demonstrated" the method of "Demonizing the victims" of the dark ages.

This is so blatant on this thread - a child could get the point easily.

What do you "tell yourselves"? How can you possibly silence your conscience on these points?

How can you "pretend" not to "get it"???

I find that aspect of the dialogue - fascinating.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I think it might be appropriate for all Catholic and Protestant denominations to admit that, historically, we have slaughtered one another mercilessly and been about as far away from the example given us by the Lord Jesus Christ as we could possably get. Look at the thirty years war emmerging out of the Protestant reformation. The question is not what has happened historically, but what are we going to do now!

 

Smoky - you are zeroing in on "the point".

#1. EVEN In the Pope's recent apology the RCC is VERY clear that NO specific act of atrocity in the dark ages is being "apologized for".

#2. By "contrast" as the "other example provides" non-Catholic churches ARE free to apologize for any act that they consider "less than Christian" EVEN if it is NOT an act taken at the DEMONIATIONAL level.

#3. The RCC members STILL today (as CathConvert points out) demonize the victims that were slaughtered and tortured by the RCC in its "dark ages" and EVEN argue that "it would have been more beneficial for them to act with MORE Force".

The "contrast" COULD NOT be greator.

In Christ,

Bob

 

While one may be "baffled" by EWTN's Dr. Carroll and his insistence that the "Pope's apology - does not apologize FOR ANYTHING specific" that you could say "well then you admit you were wrong in that atrocity". And why not?

CatholicConvert - makes the point well. The "rationale" for torture and slaughter still exists -just not the "opportunity". The RCC does not apologize for what she does not reject. Indeed due to the claims of infallability - she "can not" reject those deeds much less apologize for them.

And "that" is a problem that no other Christian denomination "could have" by definition.

In Christ,

Bob

 

There is a note about the RCC policy of extermination on the other thread - but it really should go here.

coming up.

Enjoy the light! See it for the first time.

See the note from Catholic Convert and then "compare" to the RCC statements quoted below.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Catholic apologists often argue that the RCC isn't accountable for the Inquisition, since the state carried out the torturing and the executions. It was the RCC who defined these people as "heretics", however, and the RCC handed them over to the state (John 19:11).

We know from the decrees of Popes and councils that the RCC viewed itself as having authority over the state.

The Fourth Lateran Council, for example, the ecumenical council that dogmatized transubstantiation, declared (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html):

”Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that
whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the
supreme pontiff [the Pope], 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 (that is, are independent). 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.


Other councils, such as Vienna, issued anti-Semitic decrees that ordered the persecution of Jews. The persecution of other groups, such as the Waldensians, was also ordered by the RCC.
For example, Pope Innocent VIII issued a bull in 1487 ordering that people "rise up in arms against" and "tread under foot" the Waldensians.
Roman Catholic and former Jesuit Peter de Rosa writes in Vicars of Christ (Crown Publishers, 1988), "Of eighty popes
in a line from the thirteenth century on not one of them disapproved of the theology and apparatus of the Inquisition. On the contrary, one after another added his own cruel touches to the workings of this deadly machine."
The Catholic historian von Dollinger writes in The Pope and the Council,
"From 1200 to 1500 the long series of Papal ordinances on the Inquisition, ever increasing in severity and cruelty, and their whole policy towards
heresy, runs on without a break. It is a rigidly consistent system of legislation; every Pope confirms and improves upon the devices of his predecessor....It was only the absolute dictation of the Popes, and the notion of their infallibility in all questions of Evangelical morality, that made the Christian world...[accept] the Inquisition, which contradicted the simplest principles of Christian justice and love to our neighbor, and would have been
rejected with universal horror in the ancient Church."

Consider the following news stories from late last year.

Vatican Hosts Inquisition Symposium

By CANDICE HUGHES

.c The Associated Press

VATICAN CITY (AP) – The Vatican assembled a blue-ribbon panel of scholars Thursday to examine the Inquisition and declared its readiness to submit the church's darkest institution to the judgment of history.

The three-day symposium is part of the Roman Catholic Church's countdown to 2000. Pope John Paul II wants the church to begin the new millennium with a clear conscience, which means facing up to past sins.

For many people, the Inquisition is one of the church's worst transgressions. For centuries, ecclesiastical ``thought police'' tried, tortured and burned people at the stake for heresy and other crimes.

``The church cannot cross the threshold of the new millennium without pressing its children to purify themselves in repentance for their errors, infidelity, incoherence,'' Cardinal Roger Etchegaray said, opening the conference.

The inquisitors went after Protestants, Jews, Muslims and presumed heretics. They persecuted scientists like Galileo. They banned the Bible in anything but Latin, which few ordinary people could read.

The Inquisition began in the 13th century and lasted into the 19th. An index of banned books endured even longer, until 1966. And it was 1992 before the church rehabilitated Galileo, condemned for saying the Earth wasn't the center of the universe.

The symposium, which gathers experts from inside and outside the church, is the Vatican's first critical look at the church's record of repression.

Among other things, it will give scholars a chance to compare notes on what they've found in the secret Vatican archives on the Inquisition, which the Holy See only recently opened.

``The church is not afraid to submit its past to the judgment of history,'' said Etchegaray, a Frenchman who leads the Vatican's Commission on the Grand Jubilee.

Closed to the public and press, the symposium is not expected to produce any definitive statement from the Vatican on the Inquisition. That is expected in 2000 as part of the grand ``mea culpa'' at the start of Christianity's third millennium.

The great question is whether the pontiff will ask forgiveness for the sins of the church's members, as it did with the Holocaust, or for the sins of the church itself. Unlike the Holocaust, the Inquisition was a church initiative authorized by the popes themselves.

Etchegaray on Thursday swept aside the idea that it can be seen a series of local campaigns whose excesses might be blamed on secular authorities. There was only one Inquisition, he said, and it was undeniably an ecclesiastical institution.

The pontiff may give a hint as to his thinking on Saturday, when he meets with participants in the conference.

About 50 scholars from Europe, the United States and Latin America are taking part.

AP-NY-10-29-98 1403EST



Catholic Church says must own up for Inquisition

By Alessandra Galloni

VATICAN CITY, Oct 29 (Reuters) - The Vatican on Thursday said it had to take responsibility for one of the darkest eras in Roman Catholic church history and not lay blame for the Inquisition on civil prosecutors.

Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, head of the Vatican's main committee for the year 2000, opened a three-day symposium on the Inquisition saying it was time to re-examine the work of the special court the church set up in 1233 to curb heresy.

Etchegaray said some scholars claimed there were several inquisitions: one in Rome, which worked directly under the Holy See's control, and others in Spain and in Portugal which were often aided by the local civil courts.

``We cannot ignore the fact that this (attempt to distinguish between inquisitions) has allowed some to make apologetic arguments and lay responsibility for what Iberian tribunals did onto civil authorities,'' he said.

``The fact that the Spanish and Portuguese crowns...had powers of intervention...on inquisitory tribunals does not change the ecclesiastical character of the institution,'' he said.

Pope Gregory IX created the Inquisition to help curb heresy, but church officials soon began to count on civil authorities to fine, imprison and even torture heretics.

One of the Inquisition's best known victims was the astronomer Galileo, condemned for claiming the earth revolved around the sun.

The Inquisition reached its height in the 16th century to counter the Reformation. The department later became the Holy Office and its successor now is called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which controls the orthodoxy of Catholic teaching.

Some of the conclusions of the international symposium, which ends on Saturday, could be included in a major document in which the church is expected to ask forgiveness for its past errors as part of celebrations for the year 2000.

The church ``cannot pass into the new millennium without urging its sons to purify themselves, through penitence, of its errors, its infidelities and its incoherences...,'' Father Georges Cottier, a top Vatican theologian and head of the theological commission for the year 2000, told the symposium.

Etchegaray said the conference could also draw on examples that scholars had been able to examine since January, when the Vatican opened secret files.

The archives also opened the infamous Index of Forbidden Books which Roman Catholics were not allowed to read or possess on pain of excommunication. Even the bible was on the blacklist.

Pope John Paul has said in several documents and speeches that the Church needs to assume responsibility for the Inquisition, which was responsible for the forced conversion of Jews as well as the torture and killing of heretics.

While there may have been mitigating historical factors for the behaviour of some Catholics, the Pope has said this did not prevent the church from expressing regret for the wrongs of its members in some periods of history.

He initiated the procedure that led to the rehabilitation of Galileo, completed in 1992.

19:01 10-29-98


In Christ,

Bob

 

As you can see - I have had that "RCC admits to exterminations" file around for a couple of years.

Interesting that when confronted with the huge subject of a massive institution in the dark ages admitting to "exterminating" its victims - the cogent reply is "that report is a couple of years old isnt that funny??".

So... Still waiting for that objective, detailed cogent reply to the salient points of those RC reports.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Associated Press and Reuters are hardly "RC reports".

Without proper use of quotation marks, it is impossible to tell where one person's words end and another person's editorial begins.

In the future it would probably work more to the benefit of truth if you tried to not adulterate your source material.

As to your "Papal Bull": a bull is a seal which is applied to almost any correspondence as an assurance of authenticity. For the bull which you cite to be of relevance in this discussion, more information is necessary. I will withhold judgement on it until you can source it better.

As to the Fourth Lateran Council Canon 3, if you read the complete document, you will notice that provisions are made for restoring people to the Church after judgement of guilt. Dead persons are not capable of being restored to good standing within the Church community so perhaps you make making some sort of incorrect judgement of the word exterminate.

One could exterminate heresy without killing people.

Tell me, Bob, do you not think that it is the responsibilty of the Church to call on those in civil authority who are members of the Church to defend the faith?

Let's look at today. Does not the Christian church in totality have an obligation to call for our political leaders to defend the faith and oppose abortion?

Opposing abortion would mean making laws with penalties. Civil penalties. Would that then mean that the Church would be ordering the civil government to imprision people?

BTW, you are viewing this with your miopic view of contemporary American politics. At an earlier time in history there was little thought of the protections and liberties which we enjoy today.

You are attempting to apply today's standards to a time and culture very foreign to your experience.

BTW, it would be really great if you would address points made by others directly instead of dragging out some file that you have saved for a few years. It possibly could help you to more directly address the other parties points in a more relevant way.

Just a thought.