 |
| |
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:32
|
|
H: further, explain this:
"1 Timothy 3:1-6 ķ THIS [is] a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
His ducal folowers were killing, robbing and banning catholics in thousands. I hope protestant churches will once have courage to apologise for it. |
This applied to both sides.
The catholics did the same thing to protestants.
Especially during the 30year war you could expect the worst of your city was conquered by troops from the other confession.
Whole villages were erradicated and whole regions depopulated by this great religious war on german soil.
Even if you had the same confession as the general who conquered your city it wouldnīt mean autonmatically thatyou were spared as both, the swedish (protestant) as well as Wallensteins (catholic) troops consisted mainly of mercenaries who didnīt care about the confession of the people which they killed or raped or whose houses they looted.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
The protestants did more evil, simply because they had more possibilities of making it. Spain could not steal a lot of land from protestants or persecute them too much, simply because both large numbers of protestants and lands owned by them were missing.
On the other hand, every protestant state was catholic before |
I canīt remember protestants doing such things to other christian confessions like the catholics for example did to the catharans.
(for those who donīt know it: a christian sect which had large holdings in southern france, was pacifist [they employed mercenaries for their own protexction though] and also didnīt care for people of other religions.
They get into the crosshairs of the RCC as they refused to pay a tithe. It resulted in a great war which was fought wich utter brutality and also resulted in the catholic general doing abominable things to the civilians within the catharan cities they conquered.
For example it is told of one catharan city where all civilians were blinded, exept of one single civilian, who retained one eye and was ordered to lead the other civilians to the next catholi9c town, as the catharan city would be razed to the ground.
Other had a worse fate as they were just burned on the stake.
Never heard of the protestants doing these things to other christians. It might be that the citizens of a noble who turned to the protestant faith had the choice to either also convert or leave the land, but this was normal and was done throughout all the small states within europe.
But I never heard of the protestants persecuting the catholics so much like the catholics persecuted other christian confessions (as mentioned with the example of the 30 year war, where both, the catholic as well as the protestant armies commited the worst of atrocities to the population)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
|
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
Luther was a genuine heretic. He started a heretic church which destroyed the unity of Christians and started a serie of infortunate events in history.
His ducal folowers were killing, robbing and banning catholics in thousands. I hope protestant churches will once have courage to apologise for it. |
How in the world can the Catholic Church reach out to the Protestants until it resolves the issue of Luther?
BTW, how do you feel on the issue of buying indulgences to get your relatives out of purgatory?
I had thought that Catholic Church would have decided that Luther was right that only God can forgive sins and that this required true repentance by the sinner. But I was wrong. I found this in the Catholic encyl.
"The Council of Constance condemned among the errors of Wyclif the proposition: "It is foolish to believe in the indulgences granted by the pope and the bishops" (Sess. VIII, 4 May, 1415; see Denzinger-Bannwart, "Enchiridion", 622). In the Bull "Exsurge Domine", 15 June, 1520, Leo X condemned Luther's assertions that "Indulgences are pious frauds of the faithful"; and that "Indulgences do not avail those who really gain them for the remission of the penalty due to actual sin in the sight of God's justice" (Enchiridion, 75S, 759), The Council of Trent (Sess, XXV, 3-4, Dec., 1563) declared: "Since the power of granting indulgences has been given to the Church by Christ, and since the Church from the earliest times has made use of this Divinely given power, the holy synod teaches and ordains that the use of indulgences, as most salutary to Christians and as approved by the authority of the councils, shall be retained in the Church; and it further pronounces anathema against those who either declare that indulgences are useless or deny that the Church has the power to grant them (Enchridion, 989). It is therefore of faith (de fide)
that the Church has received from Christ the power to grant indulgences, and
that the use of indulgences is salutary for the faithful,"
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-04-2005 06:52
|