Reformists

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='StColette' date='Nov 15 2004, 07:10 PM'] mmmm steak lol sorry Al I couldn't help it lol [/quote]
LOL...

[StColette]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Nov 15 2004, 06:11 PM'] :nanny: [/quote]


this thread needed a laugh

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Nov 15 2004, 07:05 PM'] Please note the little "I do not rep the Church" badge on CatholicCrusader... [/quote]
Please note that the person who gives out the badge doesn't necessarily rep the Church merely because he gives it out. If he doesn't then, it would follow that those who DO rep the Church could get said badge for contradicting what he thinks "reping the Church means". Certainly in this case: to rep the Church means to be FOR WHAT THE CHURCH DID--which was the captial punishment of heretics.

And thanks Al for the support at least for the fact of Order.

[noncatholicname]

Make no mistake about it, if one of you showed up on my doorstep with a papal bull calling for my death, you would die first. :angry:

[Guest Aluigi]

lol.. sorry capital punishment is only justly inflicted by those in authority. well, i guess if there was a papal bull (that would probably mean that you were dangerous going from Catholic church to Catholic church spreading a big heresy... then you'd be dangerous and perhaps there'd be a reason to come after you, it'd be just to throw you in some jail or somethin or whatever... not my decision)

don't worry, you sit around minding your own business you've got no chance of being convicted of heresy... and no one can say whether or not your culpable for heresy...

by the way, historically, only heretics causing damage through their heresy have been executed. and not even damage to the Catholic culture (they were more commonly put in jail or something) but damage to human life... people who committed abortions because their heresy said it wasn't wrong, or people that committed adultery because their heresy said there was no sanctity in marriage

Edited November 15, 2004 by Aluigi

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='noncatholicname' date='Nov 15 2004, 07:14 PM'] Make no mistake about it, if one of you showed up on my doorstep with a papal bull calling for my death, you would die first. :angry: [/quote]
What if it was just a member of the Pontifical College Josephinum's basketball team...the Papal Bulls...?

[noncatholicname]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Nov 15 2004, 06:18 PM'] lol.. sorry capital punishment is only justly inflicted by those in authority. well, i guess if there was a papal bull (that would probably mean that you were dangerous going from Catholic church to Catholic church spreading a big heresy... then you'd be dangerous and perhaps there'd be a reason to come after you, it'd be just to throw you in some jail or somethin or whatever... not my decision)

don't worry, you sit around minding your own business you've got no chance of being convicted of heresy... and no one can say whether or not your culpable for heresy...

by the way, historically, only heretics causing damage through their heresy have been executed. and not even damage to the Catholic culture (they were more commonly put in jail or something) but damage to human life... people who committed abortions because their heresy said it wasn't wrong, or people that committed adultery because their heresy said there was no sanctity in marriage [/quote]
Then I would be considered a danger because I'm a reformed protestant. And my statement still stands.

[noncatholicname]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Nov 15 2004, 06:20 PM'] What if it was just a member of the Pontifical College Josephinum's basketball team...the Papal Bulls...? [/quote]
If they haven't come to kill me, then they get to live.

[Guest Aluigi]

then perhaps you'd be justly imprisoned IF WE LIVED IN A CATHOLIC CULTURE.

if the heresy you followed were one that allowed for murder and you killed people, you'd be justly executed in a Catholic culture. if the heresy you followed said you could commit adultury, or currupt minors, or murder babies out of the womb, you'd be justly executed in a Catholic culture.

but more likely than not if all you did was disrupt society and spread your heresy to a lot of Catholics, you'd probably be imprisoned.

[Guest Aluigi]

anyway, you're allowed to kill in self defense but Catholic government in medieval times wasn't allowed to kill in self defense? hmm...

[Don John of Austria]

Man is not saved by Works such would be a heresy.

Man is not saved by Faith, such would also be a heresy.

Man is saved by Grace and Grace alone, Faith allows one to accept the Grace freely offered to all, works are an outword expression of that Grace. Certianly Works are neccessary for salvation-- the Sacraments are works and are neccessary for Salvation as they, through the power of God, bestow the Grace by which we are Justified. Likewise Faith is neccessary for salvation for with out it we will not accet the Grace that is offered.

We are justified by Faith only in the sense that Faith is the beginning of Human Salvation We are saved by works only in the sense that works must precede the final justification of Grace.



Here are the relevent sections from the Council of Trent on Justification.
WHO ARE JUSTIFIED THROUGH CHRIST
But though He died for all,[16] yet all do not receive the benefit of His death, but those only to whom the merit of His passion is communicated; because as truly as men would not be born unjust, if they were not born through propagation of the seed of Adam, since by that propagation they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own, so if they were not born again in Christ, they would never be justified, since in that new birth there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace by which they are made just. For this benefit the Apostle exhorts us always to give thanks to the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, and hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love, in whom we have redemption and remission of sins.[17]
CHAPTER IV
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER AND ITS MODE IN THE STATE OF GRACE
In which words is given a brief description of the justification of the sinner, as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior. This translation however cannot, since promulgation of the Gospel, be effected except through the laver of regeneration or its desire, as it is written: Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.[18]
CHAPTER VII
IN WHAT THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER CONSISTS, AND WHAT ARE ITS CAUSES
This disposition or preparation is followed by justification itself, which is not only a remission of sins but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts whereby an unjust man becomes just and from being an enemy becomes a friend, that he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.[30]
The causes of this justification are: the final cause is the glory of God and of Christ and life everlasting; the efficient cause is the merciful God who washes and sanctifies[31] gratuitously, signing and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance,[32] the meritorious cause is His most beloved only begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies,[33] for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us,[34] merited for us justification by His most holy passion on the wood of the cross and made satisfaction for us to God the Father, the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith,[35] without which no man was ever justified finally, the single formal cause is the justice of God, not that by which He Himself is just, but that by which He makes us just, that, namely, with which we being endowed by Him, are renewed in the spirit of our mind,[36] and not only are we reputed but we are truly called and are just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the Holy Ghost distributes to everyone as He wills,[37] and according to each one's disposition and cooperation.
For though no one can be just except he to whom the merits of the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ are communicated, yet this takes place in that justification of the sinner, when by the merit of the most holy passion, the charity of God is poured forth by the Holy Ghost in the hearts[38] of those who are justified and inheres in them; whence man through Jesus Christ, in whom he is ingrafted, receives in that justification, together with the remission of sins, all these infused at the same time, namely, faith, hope and charity. For faith, unless hope and charity be added to it, neither unites man perfectly with Christ nor makes him a living member of His body.[39] For which reason it is most truly said that faith without works is dead[40] and of no profit, and in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision, but faith that worketh by charity.[41]
This faith, conformably to Apostolic tradition, catechumens ask of the Church before the sacrament of baptism, when they ask for the faith that gives eternal life, which without hope and charity faith cannot give. Whence also they hear immediately the word of Christ: If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.[42] Wherefore, when receiving true and Christian justice, they are commanded, immediately on being born again, to preserve it pure and spotless, as the first robe[43] given them through Christ Jesus in place of that which Adam by his disobedience lost for himself and for us, so that they may bear it before the tribunal of our Lord Jesus Christ and may have life eternal.
CHAPTER VIII
HOW THE GRATUITOUS JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER BY FAITH IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD
But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely,[44] these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God[45] and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification. For, if by grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is no more grace.[46]
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]

[noncatholicname]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Nov 15 2004, 06:32 PM'] anyway, you're allowed to kill in self defense but Catholic government in medieval times wasn't allowed to kill in self defense? hmm... [/quote]
You can give up now, because you and catholic crusader have both lost me.

[Guest Aluigi]

a Catholic state that used capital punishment to stomp out dangerous heresies (dangerous because they generally included committing crimse like murder) you seem to be against. why?

in a Catholic state, if you attempted to spread heresy, you'd very likely go to jail or something. if you committed crimes because of heresy, you could be executed.

it's self defense, defending the people of the society. do you think the state ever has the right of capital punishment?

[noncatholicname]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Nov 15 2004, 06:44 PM']

a Catholic state that used capital punishment to stomp out dangerous heresies (dangerous because they generally included committing crimse like murder) you seem to be against. why?

in a Catholic state, if you attempted to spread heresy, you'd very likely go to jail or something. if you committed crimes because of heresy, you could be executed.

it's self defense, defending the people of the society. do you think the state ever has the right of capital punishment? [/quote]
What did I just say? I'm a protestant. If this suddenly became a catholic state, I would continue to preach the gospel that I believe is true. History has shown what I would do would merit my death.

You've also stated where your loyalties lie on that regard. You and catholic crusader would be inquistors and executioners. You can give up now.

[Guest Aluigi]

history has shown that so long as your spreading of the protestant gospel didn't include criminal activity like murder or adultery or abortion or something, you'd end up in jail in a Catholic state.

[noncatholicname]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Nov 15 2004, 06:55 PM'] history has shown that so long as your spreading of the protestant gospel didn't include criminal activity like murder or adultery or abortion or something, you'd end up in jail in a Catholic state. [/quote]
John Hus, burned at the stake for promoting John Wycliffe's ideas that people should be allowed to read the bible in thier native tongue and oppose the tyrany of rome, which had threatened execution of anyone possessing anything else but a latin vulgate.

Wycliffes remains, having died some years earlier, were ordered dug and and burned by papal command. Imagine that.

Savonarola was hanged and burned at the stake in Florence Italy for heresy.

Thomas Bilney was an ordained priest who preached that salavation was through Christ alone, and that rites and rituals were empty unless undertaken with this attitude. He denounced the worship of relics and saints and that the idolatry of christendom had kept the jews from Christ. He didn't differ with the church over communion, the mass, confession or any substantial doctrines, just these. He was burned to death.

John Frith was burned because he denied that the eucharist was Christ's body and blood. He witnessed to the man who was being burned with him, Andrew Hewitt. It took two hours for them to die because the wind was blowing the fire away from them.

William Tyndale was garroted and burned at the stake. His big blasphemy? Printing the new testiment in English and using Greek and Hebrew souces rather than latin sources.

Bishops Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley... John Hooper and John Bradford... Arch Bishop Thomas Cranmer watched them burn, but that didn't stop him from staying true to his beliefs. He too was burned to death.

History paints a different picture.

[Guest Aluigi]

1) have i ever claimed every execution in history was just? nope

2) the history of the inquisition shows they mainly executed those who committed crimes due to their heresy

of course there were some killed for simply spreading heresy, but that was less common and your beloved reformers often slaughtered people who refused to convert from Catholocism, going city to city burning every book except the Bible and all that. i'm not defending all execution, just most of the inquisition executions (because it was against heretical criminals)

i'm sure some of your examples are somewhat distorted.. but the Church did try to stop ppl from making faulty translations of the Bible, there were many misleading eroneous translations and if ppl just learned the Bible the way it was meant to be learnt, but it being read outloud in Church, it would have been simple.

even men in high places are sinners. but Church doctrine is not affected by their sins, and Church doctrine is the only thing i'm concerned about.

anyway, i'm just sayin, it's all past, protestants and Catholics did dreadful things to one another back in the day. but the state executing people for criminal heresy is not wrong.

[SirMyztiq]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Sep 10 2004, 11:41 PM'] Many times during AP Euro history, I find it disturbing to realize how often reformists claim (esp. Luther) who's their actions were oxymornic to their beliefs.

The first one I noticed, the Church holds the doctrine of men, and the doctrines weren't of God. The doctrines of all the reformists were beliefs of men... made up by them. This is a quick flaw in their thinking.

They screamed scripture is our authority, but even scripture suggests to stick to what your teachers have taught you.

The reformists claimed in Faith alone as being salvic, however, he rejected Trans. (can't spell it) which is the greatest sign of Christian faith.

Luther often time criticized the Church for being political, but Luther's movement was a political movmeent in that whenever Luther's doctrines didn't stand up at the debate table, he'd turn to the error of the people of the Church.

Anyone correct me if I'm wrong, but this list seems to be about right to me.

God bless,

Mikey [/quote]
I think he was against the whole charging for forgiveness and the complete social"wealth" basis that the church was ran under.

Besides Luther didn't want to split the church.

[Guest Aluigi]

Pope Leo X accepted over 40 of Martin Luther's Theses, and they were enacted by the Council of Trent (not like, specifically Martin Luther's theses, but what they said was the same thing Trent said); and the other 40 plus were doctrinal things that the Church said no, that's contrary to the Church's DOCTRINE.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='SirMyztiq' date='Nov 15 2004, 09:15 PM'] I think he was against the whole charging for forgiveness and the complete social"wealth" basis that the church was ran under.

Besides Luther didn't want to split the church. [/quote]
The Church was not run under the corruption. There are corrupt people in the Church, but that doesn't mean that the Church was corrupt.

Luther didn't want to split the Church, he wanted originally to fix problems with some members of the Church. He went about it a bad and uncharitable way, and by the end, he still didn't want to split the Church; he wanted the whole Church to slip into heresy.