RCC kills everyone in Europe

MikeS · Aug 20, 2003

You all know the technique of the Big Lie, I hope. Here's an example from a recent post:

that is exactly the reasoning the RCC used to slaughter millions of Christians during the dark ages. (About 50 million as it turns out).

Shall we do a little math?

The Black Plague killed about 25 million, which was 1/3 of the population of Europe in the mid-1300s. What was the population of Europe 500 years earlier (roughly the middle of the Dark Ages)? Let's say it was 1/2 of the 1300's figure, or 37 million people. Now we're told that during the Dark Ages alone the "RCC" killed about 50 million "as it turns out." Twice the number killed, half the population. It's a wonder there are any Europeans left at all.

The Big Lie. And some people fall all over themselves in their anxiousness to believe it.

"A good deal of Protestantism is little more than anti-Catholicism."
Reinhold Niehbuhr, 1959

LaRae · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by MikeS:
You all know the technique of the Big Lie, I hope. Here's an example from a recent post:

that is exactly the reasoning the RCC used to slaughter millions of Christians during the dark ages. (About 50 million as it turns out).

Shall we do a little math?

The Black Plague killed about 25 million, which was 1/3 of the population of Europe in the mid-1300s. What was the population of Europe 500 years earlier (roughly the middle of the Dark Ages)? Let's say it was 1/2 of the 1300's figure, or 37 million people. Now we're told that during the Dark Ages alone the "RCC" killed about 50 million "as it turns out." Twice the number killed, half the population. It's a wonder there are any Europeans left at all.

The Big Lie. And some people fall all over themselves in their anxiousness to believe it.

"A good deal of Protestantism is little more than anti-Catholicism."
Reinhold Niehbuhr, 1959

Mike Mike...don't you get it? Truth does NOT matter as long as the lie is used to attack the Church it's 'ok'.

You can forget trying to reason with these people who choose to believe a lie, even when presented with facts....they have their own agendas and that should be kept in mind as to their credibility about ANYTHING.

LaRae
(who is wondering if people have ever read that part in the bible about lying and being scandal mongers)

Briguy · Aug 20, 2003

Guys, I have to tell you, you are not helping yourself by a thread like this. Think about it. If someday someone says Jeffery Dahmer killed 30 people and someone replied "Thats a lie, your spreading false rumors, He didn't kill near that many" Does the fact that someone said 30 instead of 14 (I remember it as 14 - hope I'm right) make J.D. less of a murderer. Is it worse to kill 30, then it is 14? Aren't they both just horrible!

If the RCC went out and falsely killed one person back then it was wrong and it needs to be said that it was wrong.

Your not saying that the history books are false and nobody was innocently killed back then are you??

Hope you understand my point,

In Christ,
Brian

LaRae · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by Briguy:
Guys, I have to tell you, you are not helping yourself by a thread like this. Think about it. If someday someone says Jeffery Dahmer killed 30 people and someone replied "Thats a lie, your spreading false rumors, He didn't kill near that many" Does the fact that someone said 30 instead of 14 (I remember it as 14 - hope I'm right) make J.D. less of a murderer. Is it worse to kill 30, then it is 14? Aren't they both just horrible!

If the RCC went out and falsely killed one person back then it was wrong and it needs to be said that it was wrong.

Your not saying that the history books are false and nobody was innocently killed back then are you??

Hope you understand my point,

In Christ,
Brian

Brian,

Should we just stand aside and let people make these false claims? N O O

NE is denying that innoncent people were killed by Catholics AND Protestants...there is enough blood to go around.

Perhaps you will see the point I am making as well. I do hope you aren't trying to say it's ok to repeat a lie if it's partially true.

Another thing why do some people feel the need to exaggerate these numbers? Seems to me they are trying to say the more dead the worse it is..which seems to contradict your point of even if only one person it is wrong.

LaRae

WPutnam · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by Briguy:
Guys, I have to tell you, you are not helping yourself by a thread like this. Think about it. If someday someone says Jeffery Dahmer killed 30 people and someone replied "Thats a lie, your spreading false rumors, He didn't kill near that many" Does the fact that someone said 30 instead of 14 (I remember it as 14 - hope I'm right) make J.D. less of a murderer. Is it worse to kill 30, then it is 14? Aren't they both just horrible!

Briguy, I did not hear either one of them condoning any death that may have been perpetuated by the church or her clergy, just the total and complete exaggeration that has been perpetuated as the gospel truth.

We have sinful men in the Catholic Church, sir, and we have had then in every generation, starting with Judas! We have had our sinful popes, bishops and priests throughout the history of the Church, including the scandal we have today. But that in and of itself does not negate the mission and the holiness of the Church herself despite her sinful clergy.

But I am gettng off-track here, wanting to post the following link on the Inquisitions:

http://www.catholicleague.org/research/inquisition.html

If the RCC went out and falsely killed one person back then it was wrong and it needs to be said that it was wrong.

You are indeed correct! But not the exaggerated figures bantied-about all the time. You are invited to explore the following link from the old 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia on this subject:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

Follow through on some of the sub-links within, and I think you will find a quite adequate and scholarly taking of responsibility when the fault lies within the Church and her clergy.

Your not saying that the history books are false and nobody was innocently killed back then are you??

Interjecting here, I don't think they had that thought for one microsecond!

At least, I never had such a notion. Even the Crusades, with good intentions, had their faults as you well know. There were terrible things done in those times, but not with the sanctions of the Church. Note also, the providence of God, in that today, had it not been for the Crusades, Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris would be sporting minerets today!

Hope you understand my point,

And I hope you understand mine!

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+

- Anima Christi -

Soul of Christ, sanctify me.
Body of Christ, save me.
Blood of Christ, inebriate me.
Water from the side of Christ, wash me.
Passion of Christ, strengthen me.
O good Jesus, hear me;
Within Thy wounds hide me and permit
me not to be separated from Thee.
From the Wicked Foe defend me.
And bid me to come to Thee,
That with Thy Saints I may praise Thee,
For ever and ever. Amen.

Matt Black · Aug 20, 2003

Actually, the Black Death killed about 42 million

Yours in Christ (and pedantry)

Matt

thessalonian · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by Briguy:
Guys, I have to tell you, you are not helping yourself by a thread like this. Think about it. If someday someone says Jeffery Dahmer killed 30 people and someone replied "Thats a lie, your spreading false rumors, He didn't kill near that many" Does the fact that someone said 30 instead of 14 (I remember it as 14 - hope I'm right) make J.D. less of a murderer. Is it worse to kill 30, then it is 14? Aren't they both just horrible!

If the RCC went out and falsely killed one person back then it was wrong and it needs to be said that it was wrong.

Your not saying that the history books are false and nobody was innocently killed back then are you??

Hope you understand my point,

In Christ,
Brian

Brian,

Yes thou shalt not kill is one of the ten commandments and certainly not something that we should brag about. But last I checked "thou shalt not bear false witness was put on the same level as thou shalt not kill. It's a commandment and God says don't do it yet like that same Christmass fruitcake, these ridiculous numbers get passed around and you guys say "don't question them, it doesn't matter". In God's eye's it seems, lying about another persons religion or about history out of venom and hatred is a serious matter. But your post seems to do the very thing that you are criticizing this thread for. The hatred and venom against the Catholic Church expressed in lies that create more hatred and venom does much damage to the unity of the Christian faith and hinders people coming to the truth (even if that truth were Protestant, which it is not). Thus in a sense such lies kill souls by putting stumbling blocks and which is worse, To kill a man physically or spiritually? Bump up that shalt not bear false witness a peg on the sinfullness scale Brian.

Further the lie gives a simplistic answer to a difficult question. What went on at that time and why? Not to excuse things but men at that time took killing a soul seriously, believing it was worse than killing the flesh and making laws on that basis. Even Martin Luther said words that resulted in the German Government killing 100,000 Protestants.

I once say a SDA claim that 150 million were killed in the inquistions. Several Baptists on the board joined right in with him on the thread bashing Catholicism without questioning his numbers. Now, you sit on the fence. A lie is a lie. You do not properly reflect on the damage that a lie causes.

Blessings

Lorelei · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by LaRae:
NNE is denying that innoncent people were killed by Catholics AND Protestants...there is enough blood to go around.

But no one seems to care. When it is pointed out that catholics have been responisible for the death of innocent men merely because they disagreed with their doctrine, we always get the "well other people were murderers too" excuse. That really doesn't help give us a better picture of your church.

Innocent people died and it is a disgrace to degrade their memory with such reasonings as "well it wasn't that many" or "this other person's death makes us even". Let us respect the dead, admit a wrong and say we are sorry.

Originally posted by thessalonian:
lying about another persons religion or about history out of venom and hatred is a serious matter

I think catholics are guilty about misrepresenting history themselves. The catholics believe only their sources and reject others as "biased" yet expect us to embrace theirs as "impartial." Anyone not meeting their interpretation of history is labeled a liar.

There are also those who have only stated what they have read. If their information was wrong, they were not intentionally liars, they were misinformed, it would be good of you to note the difference. Proving them wrong with only catholic sources is not going to be convincing.

For those who intentionally mistate information, that is a lie and they are wrong in doing so.

~Lorelei

thessalonian · Aug 20, 2003

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by LaRae:
N O O

NE is denying that innoncent people were killed by Catholics AND Protestants...there is enough blood to go around.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"But no one seems to care. "

This is exactly my point about the 50 Million number. None of you Protestants seem to care whether it is true or not. Not even you for you deflected attention to whether Catholics care that there were people killed or not. Lies are lies and they have effects far greater than any Protestant would care to admit for they do not put them on the level of a commandment, preferring instead to focus on the sins of some men who were Catholic. Perhaps a log puller is in order. I agree that if a Catholic is misrepresenting something about Protestantism that is a problem also. Bearing false witness is as much of a commandment breaker and separates from God as physical killing does. Yet you guys always want to direct the focus back to the killing. "well it doesn't matter how many were killed if it happened to one". Yes it does matter if the number is a lie, intended to incite hatred of Catholicism that is unwarranted. It does matter if it prevents one who is neither Catholic or protestant from joining any Church because they don't know what to believe. It matters if a Protestants use of such numbers (if they are false (the numbers) and Protestantism were true, though it is not) prevented a Catholic from becomming Protestant because the distortion caused anger in the Catholic toward the Protestant. If the numbers are false but Catholicism is true (which it is I am sure you will agree) but they prevent a Protestant from embracing the truth of Catholicm, then it is a great evil. If they are false and they cause a Catholic to loose his faith they are a great evil. And it is no excuse that we say "well I didn't know that it wasn't true" if out of hatred for Catholicism or for wanting them to be true, as in gossip they just simply should not be spread.

thessalonian · Aug 20, 2003

"But no one seems to care. "

One more comment on this quote. Lorelei seems to think we don't care because we are not leaving Catholicism in droves. Well, then the Jews should have been leaving Judaism in droves as their people, even their leaders sacrificed children to Baal in the book of judges. Throw that OT out.

LaRae · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by Lorelei:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by LaRae:
NNE is denying that innoncent people were killed by Catholics AND Protestants...there is enough blood to go around.

But no one seems to care. When it is pointed out that catholics have been responisible for the death of innocent men merely because they disagreed with their doctrine, we always get the "well other people were murderers too" excuse. That really doesn't help give us a better picture of your church.

Innocent people died and it is a disgrace to degrade their memory with such reasonings as "well it wasn't that many" or "this other person's death makes us even". Let us respect the dead, admit a wrong and say we are sorry.

~Lorelei [/QUOTE]No one seems to care? What do you want us to do? Go around in sack cloth and ashes proclaiming how sorry we are every day??

Excuse me but I don't think you are up on the facts. The Catholic Church has formaly/publically apologized (and I have posted that here before, the document) for any part it had during this time.....I have yet to hear of ANY non-Catholic Church that had part in the murder of Catholics apologize.

Guess what we have sinners in our Church. I would be real interested in knowing which Church out there doesn't have sinners in the pews.

You choose what picture to accept about the Catholic Church, you choose what to believe and who to believe. Seems that some are all to eager (ie rabid) to accept the worst possible senario about the Catholic Church.

LaRae

trying2understand · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by LaRae:
I have yet to hear of ANY non-Catholic Church that had part in the murder of Catholics apologize. /QUOTE]

Don't hold your breath, LaRae.

It has a lot to do with the built in system of credible deniability.

"My little local autonomous church didn't do it!"

"That's not my little local autonomous church, so you can't blame me."

"I can't say anthing about it. They are a little local autonomous church."

WPutnam · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by trying2understand:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by LaRae:
I have yet to hear of ANY non-Catholic Church that had part in the murder of Catholics apologize.

Don't hold your breath, LaRae.

It has a lot to do with the built in system of credible deniability.

"My little local autonomous church didn't do it!"

"That's not my little local autonomous church, so you can't blame me."

"I can't say anthing about it. They are a little local autonomous church." [/QUOTE]Indeed!

The sheer size of the Catholic Church makes it the best target! Today, we Catholics are held to account for some priest who may have committed the sin of simonry and charged a fee for indulgences. Never mind, the whole Church, all the way up to the pope will be accused for perpetuating it, presenting no evidence of a papal bull, decree that may say so.

(Sarcasm mode on) I gotta go, that old rack down in my basement needs a lot of WD-40 applied to be available for the next inquisition...(Sarecasm mode off.)

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+

Rome has spoken, case is closed.

Derived from Augustine's famous Sermon.

Kathryn · Aug 20, 2003

I think catholics are guilty about misrepresenting history themselves. The catholics believe only their sources and reject others as "biased" yet expect us to embrace theirs as "impartial." Anyone not meeting their interpretation of history is labeled a liar.

It is not true that "Catholics believe only their own sources. There is such a thing as credible historians. These people can be Baptist, Catholic, atheist, etc. A credible historian looks at all the facts that can be substantiated and doesn't color his work with preconceived biases.

There is actually a very good one right here on Baptist Board in the Baptist History forum. With new methods of research a lot is being learned about history of the past. With access to wills and legal documents, a lot can be learned that discredits propaganda and biases that colored Reformation History.

Non-Catholic historians are coming out with a lot of information previously unknown about the history of Science and the history of Western Civilization. It is refreshing because most of it discredits the idea that the Catholic Church plunged the world into a Dark Age. Actually the Catholic Church led the world out of the chaos of the fall of the Roman Empire.

A very enlightening and reputable book is The Rise of Early Modern Science, Islam, China, and the West by Toby E. Huff Professor of Sociology at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth. Published by Cambridge University Press.

Another non-Catholic credible book The Waldensian Dissent Persecution and Survival c.1170-c.1570 by Professor of Early Modern History at the University of Provence, Gabriel Audisio. It is published by Cambridge University Press. He has published widely on the history of Provence and Piedmont, and on sixteenth-century religious history.

There are many more sources that are unbiased and non-Catholic that also present a good foundation of history.

God Bless

Briguy · Aug 20, 2003

Hi Thess. and others, Wow, I see I took a little heat for my post. My thought when I posted was just to let Mike and LaRae know that what they thought was making the CC look better made it look worse in a way. I was thinking at a depth where i was thinking I needed to slam the original 50 million number.

Yes, lie are wrong, the tongue is a little member but can cause great damage, the Bible clearly teaches that. I knoe exactly what you are all saying in terms of making the number so big it makes the CC look worse. If a number is exagerated to hurt another, person or church, that is wrong, dead wrong. If a number is put out there in ignorance then it is wrong in that it should not have been said without being more sure but it is not the same type of wrong. Some of us have never studied this topic in depth. What are the best guess/es on how many were killed. Please educate me so i never do what the 50 million guy did. Thanks and know I was not trying to damage the CC. There was a hint of uncaring in the initial 2 posts, which Lorelie eluded to in her post. Lies are bad, killing innocent people is bad, we should care about trying to do neither, i think we all can agree to that.

In Christ,
Brian

thessalonian · Aug 20, 2003

Hi Brian,

MY point was not to jump all over your case but to make it clear that both are sin. On that we agree.

I have a book called "salvation at stake". Can't recall the authors name but he is protestant. He analyzes it all in a very level headed unbiased way. He puts the numbers if I remember correctly on the Catholic side at 4-5000 that are verifiable and the vast majority of that was by Catholic governments. Worst case I have read is 10,000. I don't recall what his Protestant numbers were. Somewhat lower, but they were over a shorter timeframe and things were changing in both Catholic and Protestant circles during that time. Slowly people were becoming more tollerant.

The primary reason for it in both Prot and Catholic countries is that there were laws against heresy because killing a man's soul (teaching another heresy) was thought to be akin to killing his body and so was dealt with severly by Governements. It is difficult to judge the times by todays standards as in those does people could not read and the Church and Governments saw themselves as much more responsible for protecting the uneducated from error.

Thanks for the level headed post.
Blessings

LaRae · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by Briguy:
Hi Thess. and others, Wow, I see I took a little heat for my post. My thought when I posted was just to let Mike and LaRae know that what they thought was making the CC look better made it look worse in a way. I was thinking at a depth where i was thinking I needed to slam the original 50 million number.

Yes, lie are wrong, the tongue is a little member but can cause great damage, the Bible clearly teaches that. I knoe exactly what you are all saying in terms of making the number so big it makes the CC look worse. If a number is exagerated to hurt another, person or church, that is wrong, dead wrong. If a number is put out there in ignorance then it is wrong in that it should not have been said without being more sure but it is not the same type of wrong. Some of us have never studied this topic in depth. What are the best guess/es on how many were killed. Please educate me so i never do what the 50 million guy did. Thanks and know I was not trying to damage the CC. There was a hint of uncaring in the initial 2 posts, which Lorelie eluded to in her post. Lies are bad, killing innocent people is bad, we should care about trying to do neither, i think we all can agree to that.

In Christ,
Brian

Hi Brian,

Last year I watched a historical documentary show about the 'Inquisition' that was researched and produced by BBC and another group...neither had any ties to religious authority of any kind.

They had historians, professors etc from the countries most involved. They said that based on all the new documentation that they are now able to access (was restricted by various governments before) from that era, they have determined that at most 3000 to 5000 at most, were put to death at the hands of the Inquisition to include all countries involved. Certainly not the millions that people like to claim.

I believe the title was "The Spanish Inquisition" or something along those lines and I believe it was last fall when it was aired.

I posted various info I wrote down as I watched the show, on another forum...I will see if I can find that in archives and post more info here.

LaRae

MikeS · Aug 20, 2003

Originally posted by Briguy:
Guys, I have to tell you, you are not helping yourself by a thread like this. Think about it. If someday someone says Jeffery Dahmer killed 30 people and someone replied "Thats a lie, your spreading false rumors, He didn't kill near that many" Does the fact that someone said 30 instead of 14 (I remember it as 14 - hope I'm right) make J.D. less of a murderer. Is it worse to kill 30, then it is 14? Aren't they both just horrible!

If the RCC went out and falsely killed one person back then it was wrong and it needs to be said that it was wrong.

Your not saying that the history books are false and nobody was innocently killed back then are you??

Hope you understand my point,

In Christ,
Brian

Brian,

If I say that Protestants lynched 20 million blacks in the South, would you be OK with that, even though the number is a "little" high? Or would you point out that the number is so high as to be ludicrous and very likely malicious. And would you also point out that since most of the South is Protestant, identifying evil behavior as behavior by Protestants is suggesting a linkage between the teachings of Protestantism and the evil behavior that isn't necessarily present?

Neither of those perfectly legitimate objections denies that fact that some blacks were indeed lynched by some Protestants, and that in some of those cases there was a warped (as we now recognize it) religious component to the behavior.

BobRyan · Aug 20, 2003

I love the logic of this thead - of the form "lets go ask the RCC to honestly tell us exactly how many people she tortured and murdered during her 1260 year spree - we have no reason to believe she has an incentive NOT to be forthright - right?".

She can't deny killing/slaughtering by the 1000's EVEN of HER OWN let alone those outside the RCC - so it is not DID she do it - but HOW OFTEN? And who better to get the honest view - than the one you "claim" was burning bibles and silencing objectors - eh?

You got to love that logic!!

(Again - you have to already BE RC to think that way).

But as for the following --

Mike S - said --

You all know the technique of the Big Lie, I hope. Here's an example from a recent post:

that is exactly the reasoning the RCC used to slaughter millions of Christians during the dark ages. (About 50 million as it turns out).

Shall we do a little math?

The Black Plague killed about 25 million, which was 1/3 of the population of Europe in the mid-1300s. What was the population of Europe 500 years earlier (roughly the middle of the Dark Ages)? Let's say it was 1/2 of the 1300's figure, or 37 million people. Now we're told that during the Dark Ages alone the "RCC" killed about 50 million "as it turns out." Twice the number killed, half the population. It's a wonder there are any Europeans left at all.

The Big Lie. And some people fall all over themselves in their anxiousness to believe it.

Indeed LET's DO some math. The slaughter of the RCC ended in the 1700's. As early as the 1800's we had our first 1 Billion people on the planet living at one single time.

RCC historians THEMSELVES claim the RCC "started" on this road of persecution and tortured around the time of the fall of the pagan Roman empire - when the papacy encorporated paganism into its practices.

So now "lets see" - which lasted longer - the 1000 years of Papal supremecy in Euorope OR the Plauge of the 1300's??? This is going to be a real "tough one" so lets put on our thinking caps and try to solve it - in the next minute or two.

Enjoy!

And notice that IN the thread where I responded the ARGUMENT was being made BY RC members as to WHY it is "ok" to torture Christians that object to the RCC doctrines. It was also noted that EWTN CONFIRMED that even Billy Graham would be tortured to death IF his evangelistic work were to be done in the RCC's dark ages.

And clearly - they were torturing EVEN their own Cardinals and rival Catholic armies at times - let alone objecting Christians in other groups.

In Christ,

Bob

BobRyan · Aug 20, 2003

But as this thread shows - it is often more "convenient" to ignore the unpleasant fact of the RCC practice of torture and death during the dark ages and just "pretend" that the 1/2 Billion alive during the 1500's and the 1 Billion alive during the late 1700's and the quater billion alive during the 1200's were "just too few" for the RCC to chalk up 50 million dead and tortured over a 1000 year period of rule in the dark ages.

Yep - wayyyy too few people indeed.

In Christ,

Bob

RCC kills everyone in Europe

New Member

LaRae

Guest

<img src =/briguy.gif>

LaRae

Guest

<img src =/2122.jpg>

Well-Known Member

New Member

<img src ="http://www.amacominc.com/~lorelei/mgsm.

New Member

New Member

LaRae

Guest

New Member

<img src =/2122.jpg>

New Member

<img src =/briguy.gif>

New Member

LaRae

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member