Spanish Inquisiton

SabbathBlessings said:

There is no Scripture that says all days our sanctified by God.

Click to expand...

Yes there is - Genesis 1, entire, and Romans 14:5-12, and Colossians 2:16.

The Liturgist said:

The point you’re missing is the unity of God - God Holy Spirit and the Only Begotten Son and incarnate Word of God, our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ are consubstantial, of one essence, that of the unoriginate Father. You’re creating a division between the persons of the Holy Trinity that is simply inapplicable.

Out of curiosity did Ellen G. White declare in her writings that Jesus Christ (who is God according to her) did not carve out the stone tablets, or did she specifically claim that the Holy Spirit did in isolation from the other two persons of the Trinity?

Click to expand...

I do not believe I am the one who is missing the point, nor do I believe I know better than the written Word of God. The Ten Commandments being written by the Holy Spirit does not show division like you are indicating, it shows unity. The Holy Spirit convicts us of these very laws if we have not harden our hearts to the deceitfulness of breaking them 1 John 3:4 Heb 3:13

The Holy Spirit is also the one who enables us to keep these very commandments through our love in Jesus.

John 14:15 15 “If you love Me, [d]keep My commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another [e]Helper, that He may abide with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

1 John 3:24 Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

So by the testimony of the Word of God shows how God’s Law and God’s Spirit work in tandem, not against.

The Liturgist said:

Yes there is - Genesis 1, entire, and Romans 14:5-12, and Colossians 2:16.

Click to expand...

Still doesn’t say all days are sanctified by God in any of these verses

Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. 2 And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

SabbathBlessings said:

So by the testimony of the Word of God shows how God’s Law and God’s Spirit work in tandem, not against.

Click to expand...

I agree that Sacred Scriptures show that three persons of the Holy Trinity, one God, do not work against each other, for a house divided cannot stand.

Therefore why do you deny that the fingers of Christ are the fingers of God? The denial contradicts the principle of divine unity you are espousing.

The Liturgist said:

I agree that Sacred Scriptures show that three persons of the Holy Trinity, one God, do not work against each other, for a house divided cannot stand.

Therefore why do you deny that the fingers of Christ are the fingers of God? The denial contradicts the principle of divine unity you are espousing.

Click to expand...

Please quote where I said

Therefore why do you deny that the fingers of Christ are the fingers of God?

Click to expand...

SabbathBlessings said:

Still doesn’t say all days are sanctified by God in any of these verses

Click to expand...

Of course it does. Take a closer look at Romans 14:5-20

The Liturgist said:

Of course it does. Take a closer look at Romans 14:5-20

Click to expand...

Romans 14:5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.

They are not disputing God’s commandments and what God sanctified, what God esteemed over all other days, the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God Exo 20:10, My holy day, the Holy day of the Lord, thus saith the Lord Isa 58:13 . You will not find the word commandment, sanctified or the Sabbath mentioned in the entire chapter. We are told not to add to God’s Word

It is referring to what MAN esteems above another, not God. Man is not God. It is about personal disputes. Much like many today argue over if Easter and Christmas are holy and should be kept or not. All man-made ideas.

SabbathBlessings said:

This is why I do not like conversing with you- you always end up making a false accusation of something I never said. Please quote where I said

Click to expand...

It’s not a false accusation; I’m not accusing you of anything, I am trying to understand why you posted what you did.

SabbathBlessings said:

The finger of God is the Holy Spirit

Click to expand...

If you did not intend to deny that the fingers of Christ are the fingers of God, then why did you post the above in a response to my post where I said the same fingers that etched the Decalogue gleaned wheat on the Sabbath?

SabbathBlessings said:

Romans 14:5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.

They are not disputing God’s commandments and what God sanctified, what God esteemed over all other days, the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God Exo 20:10, My holy day, the Holy day of the Lord, thus saith the Lord Isa 58:13 . You will not find either of these things mentioned in the entire chapter nor will you find the Sabbath mentioned.

Click to expand...

You’re reading Romans 14:5 in isolation and in contradiction to the rest of the pericope. Reread it together with Romans 14:6-20

Much like many today argue over if Easter and Christmas are holy and should be kept or not. All man-made ideas.

Click to expand...

The Incarnation and the Resurrection are not man-made ideas, and the celebration of Pascha even predates the Resurrection, but acquired its specifically resurrectional context in the rejoicing of the Holy Myrhhbearing Women and the Apostles as they began to learn over the course of the Pentecost of the Resurrection of Christ, before gathering at the third hour on Pentecost Sunday, when they received the Holy Spirit, which has the effect of further sanctifying the first day.

The first day is sanctified by virtue of being the day on which the Universe was created, on which Christ rose from the dead and on which the Holy Spirit descended, and also by virtue of pointing to life everlasting - the mystical eighth day of creation. The Creation of the Universe, the Resurrection of God Incarnate and the Descent of the Holy Spirit are the culmination and fulfilment of all God has done for us, and the life of the world to come of all He will do for us.

For that matter, Thursday is sanctified not just by the Last Supper and the institution of the Eucharist, but also because on that day Christ ascended to Heaven, and Friday is of course sanctified because on that day Christ recreated man in His image, the image of the otherwise Invisible Father, on the Cross after our creation on the same day in Genesis 1, and in the same respect, the Sabbath is sanctified by the repose of God following creation and in a tomb on that day, which is important also because we will rest before the resurrection, while being in Heaven as Christ was with the Good Thief, and thus the Sabbath becomes the ideal day for praying for the souls of our departed loved ones, so the Orthodox do that, and additionally, because He who created the universe and is unbounded resided in the womb of the Theotokos, and in the Holy Sepulchre, these days naturally celebrate His incarnation, for He who is infinite put on our finite nature even to the point of death in order to grant us life everlasting.

These practices were also adopted by the Byzantine Rite Catholics (in some cases after they were incorporated into the Roman Catholic Church, such as during the formation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and in other cases following Vatican II, when Latinization of the Byzantine Rite began to be removed, but that said, the Roman Rite has similar commemorations, for example, All Souls Day, with the same essential meaning.

What I am saying is not my own doctrine but the doctrine of Christians since antiquity. If I have made any error I have no doubt my friends such as @MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis @prodromos @jas3 @Xeno.of.athens and @chevyontheriver and others will attest to it.

Thus, since the Roman Catholic Church celebrates the most liturgies on Sabbath and has the most worshippers, and since some Catholics and some Protestants and some Eastern Orthodox churches are guilty of violence, so as i argued in another thread, there is no point in singling out the Roman church for this kind of excessive and unwarranted criticism, or of conflating the Roman church with other churches that were involved in the process of canonizaiton, such as the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, who in the course of the false Protestant vs. Catholic dichotomy, get erased from the very history where they are central.

The Liturgist said:

You’re reading Romans 14:5 in isolation and in contradiction to the rest of the pericope. Reread it together with Romans 14:6-20

Click to expand...

I have many times and the premise is human disputes Rom 14:1 and what MAN esteems - not what God esteemed in His Testimony.

Again you will not find the word commandment, sanctified or the Sabbath mentioned in the entire chapter. Best not to add what’s not there

The Liturgist said:

It’s not a false accusation; I’m not accusing you of anything, I am trying to understand why you posted what you did.

Click to expand...

Because the Bible interprets itself if we allow it to

Math 12:28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you
Luke 11: 20 But if I cast out demons with the finger of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you

The Liturgist said:

If you did not intend to deny that the fingers of Christ are the fingers of God, then why did you post the above in a response to my post where I said the same fingers that etched the Decalogue gleaned wheat on the Sabbath?

Click to expand...

Where did Jesus glean wheat on the Sabbath, verse please.

Valletta said:

First, as to the banning of Bible, you, as a good number of others, were simply misled. I hope you now realize how Catholics have and do revere the Bible. The Bible is the book of the Catholic Church--no Catholic Church, no Bible. As to governments, heads of state have often made whatever their own religion as that of the people. Moral issues, such as abortion and human trafficking, are often caught up in politics and what any religion can and should do, including the Catholic Church, is to continue to address those moral issues as per the teachings of Jesus passed down through the Apostles. Over the almost 2000 years of the Catholic Church there have been numerous problems and wrongs that needed to be righted, the times of the reformation were no different in this respect. There are well-known cases of saints coming forward having to straighten out the popes. It is the unfortunate results of the reformation that such a loss of unity took place.

Click to expand...

Yes many Catholics do and have revered the bible. But I am not the one who has been misled about the we are discussing. The majority of the leadership of Roman Catholicism has warred against the spreading of the biblical gospel throughout its history by their teachings which greatly contradict many biblical truths. Also by literally preventing all who would submit to their usurped authority via illicit relationships with kings, queens, and governments, from having the scriptures in a language they could understand for themselves. As the facts of history have chronicled. Let's tale a look at a couple of links I have already provided again, and expound upon the implications with further examination of more events directly tied to the issue of Rome's Index of Forbidden Books. From which point we will further address the more specific histories of relate to Rome's censorship of the bible.

The Roman Index of Forbidden Books, by Francis S. Betten, S.J.—A Project Gutenberg eBook

Quote below from link above, emphasis is mine.

The Roman Index of
Forbidden Books - 1909

BRIEFLY EXPLAINED FOR CATHOLIC
BOOKLOVERS AND STUDENTS BY
FRANCIS S. BETTEN, S.J.​

Rule 10. Episcopal approbation, to be printed in the beginning or at the end of the book, is required for all editions of the Bible or parts of the Bible in any language, likewise for all prayer books, books of devotion and of practical piety. Without episcopal authorization such publications are forbidden, though they may have been issued by the most learned and pious men.

Note 2. All editions of the Bible, edited by non-Catholics, in ancient as well as modern languages, are permitted to those, and those only, who are engaged in serious theological or biblical studies, provided, however, that the prolegomena and annotations do not of set purpose impugn the Catholic faith. It is not enough that the text itself is faithfully and completely rendered.

Click to expand...

Index of Prohibited Books

Quotes below from link above, emphasis is mine.

The Index of Prohibited Books (Index Librorum Prohibitorum) was a list of written works condemned as heretical or injurious to the Christian faith by the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in 1563. It remained in effect until 1966 when it was suspended, but Catholics were still expected to abide by its basic precepts.

The Council of Trent (1545-1563) was the first comprehensive effort by the Catholic Church to respond to the challenge raised by the Protestant Reformation (1517-1648). The Council effectively began what is known as the Counter-Reformation (also the Catholic Reformation, 1545 to c. 1700), which reestablished the authority of the Catholic Church. The Council of Trent decreed the Vulgate translation of the Bible as the only authoritative scripture, reformed abuses within the Church, clearly defined terms such as 'justification', 'sacraments' and 'penance', and condemned the Protestant Reformation as heresy…………………..

I: All books which have been condemned either by the supreme pontiffs or by ecumenical councils before the year 1515 and are not contained in this list, shall be considered condemned in the same manner as they were formerly condemned………….

III: The translations of writers, also ecclesiastical, which have till now been edited by condemned authors, are permitted provided they contain nothing contrary to sound doctrine. Translations of the books of the Old Testament may, in the judgment of the bishop, be permitted to learned and pious men only, provided such translations are used only as elucidations of the Vulgate edition for the understanding of the Holy Scriptures and not as the sound text. Translations of the New Testament made by authors of the first class of this list shall be permitted to no one, since great danger and little usefulness usually results to readers from their perusal. But if with such translations as are permitted, or with the Vulgate edition some annotations are circulated, these may also, after the suspected passages have been expunged by the theological faculty of some Catholic university or by the general inquisition, be permitted to those to whom the translations are permitted. Under these circumstances, the entire volume of the sacred books, which commonly called the biblia Vatabli, or parts of it, may be permitted to pious and learned men. From the Bibles of Isidore Clarius of Brescia, however, the preface and introduction are to be removed, and no one shall regard its text as the text of the Vulgate edition……..

Finally, all the faithful are commanded not to presume to read or possess any books contrary to the prescriptions of these rules or the prohibition of this list. And if anyone should read or possess books by heretics or writings by any author condemned and prohibited by reason of heresy or suspicion of false teaching, he incurs immediately the sentence of excommunication. He, on the other hand, who reads or possesses books prohibited under another name shall, besides incurring the guilt of mortal sin, be severely punished according to the judgment of the bishops.

Click to expand...

From the above highlighted sections of quoted materials, among the few english translations of the index’s under examination which I could find, we can ascertain the following.

Catholics were forbidden to read and or probably therefore own, any Bible that did not have an official printed or stamped church approval in the beginning, or at the end of the book.

None but those engaged in serious theological or biblical studies, with permission from the church, were allowed to have or read any Bibles edited by non Catholics. Even at that, such could only read them if they contained no question or critical critique of the church. Regardless of how accurate a translation they were or not. Any Roman Catholic however, who wished to translate the bible into the vernacular or language of the common people, would likely be excommunicated for doing so. Thereby of course, making their translation a forbidden one.

The Catholic church declared a translation of the Bible (the Vulgate), which most of the populations of Europe could no longer read or understand, to be the only authoritative translation of the Bible. While forbidding the reading of newer translations of the Bible written specifically for the purpose of those very people, to know and understand the Holy Scriptures for themselves. As the following links and or quotes state.

What Happened to Latin After the Fall of Rome?

Quotes below from link above, emphasis is mine.

Latin’s diverging paths

From 75 BC to the 3rd century AD, Classical Latin was the norm, at least in written works. This eventually evolved into Medieval Latin from the 600s to 1000s AD. While Medieval Latin was still spoken by European elites, common people spoke their own local dialects. It was important for elites to be able to talk to other elites from other regions, but the local dialects were becoming increasingly diverse. As a result, they also became less and less intelligible to people outside those local regions.

By the 5th century AD, Vulgar Latin was already divided into several dialects and forms. As the Western Empire fell and the cultural sphere fragmented, the various dialects began to evolve in different directions……………………….

The process was slow but real. Nobody had any idea of it; they thought they spoke Latin, just as ever. But it had been 800 years since Latin was first codified into a written language, and the written High Latin and spoken Vulgar Latin had separated quite effectively. Already in 753, the Papal legates complained they had difficulties understanding the envoys of the Frankish king Pepin the Short……………………..

In the 1000s AD, we reach an important linguistic crossroads, where elites begin speaking their own local tongues and Latin itself is relegated to the scholarly realm, which we now refer to as Renaissance Latin. This, in turn, morphed into so-called Contemporary Latin (an odd term, since no-one writes scholarly papers in Latin anymore). And that’s more or less where Latin stands today……………….

Click to expand...

Christians were people of a Book. With one or two exceptions, no religion in the ancient world concentrated so much on a sacred text in its thinking, liturgy, and spirituality like Christianity and Judaism. Of course, this text was the Bible. This commitment to the Bible, and the eagerness of Christians to share its message with all nations, would be a leading factor in Latin’s continued survival.

Jerome was a Church Father who spoke Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. In the late-4th century — a mere century before Rome’s collapse — he was commissioned by Pope Damasus to translate the Bible into Latin. For the next two decades, this was his biggest project. Despite popular opinion, Jerome’s translation was not the first Latin Bible. There were many Old Latin Bibles in circulation. Jerome’s job was to produce a corrected standard edition. His translation would not catch on at first, but it grew in authority over time. He would not complete the project, but others after him would continue his work. The eventual result would be the Vulgate Bible………………………

By the seventeenth century, however, the attempts by humanists to restore classical Latin became overshadowed by the rise of the vernacular languages and the discoveries of the scientific revolution. Many European vernacular languages, such as French, English, and Italian, were highly developed and had become classical languages in their own right by this time. Each could boast of their own great writers, such as Dante (1265–1321) and Shakespeare (1564–1616). Furthermore, people still had to come up with new words to describe the new discoveries in science and technology that surpassed those of the Romans. Although scholars of the scientific revolution were trained in classical Latin, the number of academic works written in the vernacular began to increase rapidly. For example, Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) published some of his scientific results in Italian, Isaac Newton (1642–1727) in English, and Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646–1716) in French. It took a long time before Latin was altogether replaced by the vernacular languages. In the early modern period, the choice of Latin still offered a writer several advantages. First, a work in Latin reached a broader audience since Latin was an international language. Second, Latin offered a more stable and standardized medium, while the vernacular languages were in a state of flux and changing rapidly. As society changed, the need for knowing Latin declined, and by the nineteenth century the vernacular languages had all but taken over.

Click to expand...

Apart from the issue of usurped authority or not, the real problems with papal restrictions concerning vernacular translations of the Holy Scriptures, are regarding the defense of and or attack upon personal freedoms and liberty. The Roman Churches Index of Forbidden Books was in and of itself, just that. Instructions regarding what its own adherents could read or not. It was the Roman Churches amalgamation with the state, and the legislative state’s enforcement of her desires, that posed and effected the real threat. And a real threat upon the personal liberties and lives of all, she most certainly was, and continues to be. To this very day, she seeks and establishes accords with every and any nations she can. Any and all governments which will accept and enforce her teachings upon their citizens, are just another arm of her usurped power over individual consciences. It was these laws enforced by the state, which destroyed liberty, and established tyrrany. Which laws the church of Rome first inspired and then supported. The following testimony sums up the truth well, concerning the church of Rome’s real effect upon societies regarding the Holy Scriptures.

It is idle for Rome to say, “I gave you the Bible, and therefore you must believe in me before you can believe in it.” The facts we have already narrated conclusively dispose of this claim. Rome did not give us the Bible — she did all in her power to keep it from us; she retained it under the seal of a dead language; and when others broke that seal, and threw open its pages to all, she stood over the book, and, unsheathing her fiery sword, would permit none to read the message of life, save at the peril of eternal anathema.

We owe the Bible — that is, the transmission of it — to those persecuted communities which we have so rapidly passed in review. They received it from the primitive Church, and carried it down to us. They translated it into the mother tongues of the nations. They colported it over Christendom, singing it in their lays as troubadours, preaching it in their sermons as missionaries, and living it out as Christians. They fought the battle of the Word of God against tradition, which sought to bury it. They sealed their testimony for it at the stake. But for them, so far as human agency is concerned, the Bible would, ere this day, have disappeared from the world. Their care to keep this torch burning is one of the marks which indubitably certify them as forming part of that one true Catholic Church, which God called into existence at first by His word, and which, by the same instrumentality, He has, in the conversion of souls, perpetuated from age to age. (THE HISTORY OF PROTESTANTISM BY THE REV. J. A. WYLIE, LL.D., BOOK 1 CHAP. 12, Page 94)

Click to expand...

While a very different form of Catholicism of the 4th century may be credited with giving us the Latin Vulgate, it most certainly did not give us the bible. A though God had not up until then, nor would not have seen to it through other means. Nevertheless, pastime progressed the Roman Church declared a monopoly upon biblical translations, which resulted in countless people not having the scriptures in their own language for many centuries. Dependent therefore upon Roman Catholicism for truth as it were, which was the real point of doing so. Ungodly control over the masses it determined to lord over.

A more thorough and specific examination of the laws enforcing the church of Rome’s wishes, will be forthcoming, not to mention specifically recorded punishments regarding the same. This is not for the purpose of trashing Catholics as many will no doubt claim, but for the sake of historical accuracy. In the hopes of preventing any such future abuses upon humanity in the supposed name and or authority of our blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. For it is also well and right for all to remember, that these events took place within and or upon predominantly Roman Catholic peoples. From among whom the greater part of all those excommunicated and finally declared to be Protestants, arose. Roman Catholics both desiring to place the scriptures in the hands of the majorities in their vernacular, and those demanding their individual right to have and read such, which they believed the present leadership of their own faith was denying them.

I think your anti-Catholicism is showing by suggesting the Declaration of Independence and Constitution are somehow in violation of Catholic teaching. It is true that mostly Protestants were involved in the creation of those documents, but remember Catholics were severely discriminated in the colonies, in most of the colonies Catholics were not even allowed to vote or be involved in politics. In Virginia Catholic priests were arrested for just entering the colony.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand what I have said. Independent thinking Roman Catholics of the past and present, supported and or support our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, against past and present teachings of the Vatican and the vast majority of Roman Catholic Clergy and leadership. As the examination of the following papal Encyclical and another after it, will aptly demonstrate. These are papal Encyclicals written shortly after the reestablishment of the Vatican and papal authority, after its dismantling during the French Revolution.

The following excerpts are taken from the first papal social encyclical published after the French Revolution.


Mirari Vos - Papal Encyclicals

Mirari Vos


On Liberalism and Religious Indifferentism


Pope Gregory XVI - 1832​

We think that you wonder why, from the time of Our assuming the pontificate, We have not yet sent a letter to you as is customary and as Our benevolence for you demanded. We wanted very much to address you by that voice by which We have been commanded, in the person of blessed Peter, to strengthen the brethren.[1] You know what storms of evil and toil, at the beginning of Our pontificate, drove Us suddenly into the depths of the sea. If the right hand of God had not given Us strength, We would have drowned as the result of the terrible conspiracy of impious men. The mind recoils from renewing this by enumerating so many dangers; instead We bless the Father of consolation Who, having overthrown all enemies, snatched Us from the present danger. When He had calmed this violent storm, He gave Us relief from fear. At once We decided to advise you on healing the wounds of Israel; but the mountain of concerns We needed to address in order to restore public order delayed Us…………………

Click to expand...

Though we cannot determine what exact evils and problems are being referred to in the above opening comments, we may safely determine that they are a direct result of the French Revolution and or mass rejection of papal authoritarianism which preceded this encyclical by a few decades of the revolution, and some centuries of Protestant resistance. As is apparent, the papacy considers itself and those it lords over, to be Israel. The healing of its wounds would therefore represent a healing of its spiritual and temporal authority, as both are fundamental realities of its structure and existence. Prophetically speaking then of course, this would, has, and does represent the healing of the first beast of the book of Revelation chapter 13. Which received its deadly wound from the French Revolution in mass rejection of abusive papal spiritual and temporal authority.

4. We come to you grieving and sorrowful because We know that you are concerned for the faith in these difficult times. Now is truly the time in which the powers of darkness winnow the elect like wheat.[3] “The earth mourns and fades away….And the earth is infected by the inhabitants thereof, because they have transgressed the laws, they have changed the ordinances, they have broken the everlasting covenant.”[4]

Click to expand...

Those who had rejected the papacies interpretations and enforcement of laws, ordinances, and declared everlasting covenant, had and do infect the earth with such.

5. We speak of the things which you see with your own eyes, which We both bemoan. Depravity exults; science is impudent; liberty, dissolute. The holiness of the sacred is despised; the majesty of divine worship is not only disapproved by evil men, but defiled and held up to ridicule. Hence sound doctrine is perverted and errors of all kinds spread boldly. The laws of the sacred, the rights, institutions, and discipline — none are safe from the audacity of those speaking evil. Our Roman See is harassed violently and the bonds of unity are daily loosened and severed. The divine authority of the Church is opposed and her rights shorn off. She is subjected to human reason and with the greatest injustice exposed to the hatred of the people and reduced to vile servitude. The obedience due bishops is denied and their rights are trampled underfoot. Furthermore, academies and schools resound with new, monstrous opinions, which openly attack the Catholic faith; this horrible and nefarious war is openly and even publicly waged. Thus, by institutions and by the example of teachers, the minds of the youth are corrupted and a tremendous blow is dealt to religion and the perversion of morals is spread. So the restraints of religion are thrown off, by which alone kingdoms stand. We see the destruction of public order, the fall of principalities, and the overturning of all legitimate power approaching. Indeed this great mass of calamities had its inception in the heretical societies and sects in which all that is sacrilegious, infamous, and blasphemous has gathered as bilge water in a ship’s hold, a congealed mass of all filth.

Click to expand...

Never mind the constant abuses the people who rejected her usurped authority suffered at her hands, causing their rejection of her leadership. They are all damned because of her claim of being a divinely established authority. She must of course remedy such servile conditions, as those which our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ endured for the sake of righteousness, and warned His followers they would also if they picked up their crosses and followed their Savior.

The papacy suffered such things because she would be no servant to mankind unless mankind bowed in obedience before her. She suffered the same fate as many other abusive forms of government of this world throughout history when their abused citizens rose up against them.

She also begins to identify her enemies which caused her downfall, and must be overcome in the above. It is the heretical societies and sects which have and do exist without her permission. This of course includes all Protestants, and the second rebellious child of the papacy as well, rationalism, secular humanism, and or atheism if one prefers. Children or daughters spawned by their rejection of her abusive and usurped authority.

6. These and many other serious things, which at present would take too long to list, but which you know well, cause Our intense grief. It is not enough for Us to deplore these innumerable evils unless We strive to uproot them. We take refuge in your faith and call upon your concern for the salvation of the Catholic flock. Your singular prudence and diligent spirit give Us courage and console Us, afflicted as We are with so many trials. We must raise Our voice and attempt all things lest a wild boar from the woods should destroy the vineyard or wolves kill the flock. It is Our duty to lead the flock only to the food which is healthful. In these evil and dangerous times, the shepherds must never neglect their duty; they must never be so overcome by fear that they abandon the sheep. Let them never neglect the flock and become sluggish from idleness and apathy. Therefore, united in spirit, let us promote our common cause, or more truly the cause of God; let our vigilance be one and our effort united against the common enemies.

Click to expand...

There you have it. Immediately upon being reestablished enough to write and disperse encyclicals, the papacy begins her call for open warfare against all who rejected her, as she believes, God given spiritual and temporal authority. No holds barred. All enemies, especially those viewed as wild boars by the papacy as Martin Luther was, must be dealt with in any way shape or form possible. Luther of course rejected papal authority completely after being excommunicated, and entered into the battle for liberty of conscience in a big way. The papacy certainly could not tolerate such as this.

7. Indeed you will accomplish this perfectly if, as the duty of your office demands, you attend to yourselves and to doctrine and meditate on these words: “the universal Church is affected by any and every novelty”[5] and the admonition of Pope Agatho: “nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.”[6] Therefore may the unity which is built upon the See of Peter as on a sure foundation stand firm. May it be for all a wall and a security, a safe port, and a treasury of countless blessings.[7] To check the audacity of those who attempt to infringe upon the rights of this Holy See or to sever the union of the churches with the See of Peter, instill in your people a zealous confidence in the papacy and sincere veneration for it. As St. Cyprian wrote: “He who abandons the See of Peter on which the Church was founded, falsely believes himself to be a part of the Church.”[8]…………………….

Click to expand...

That would include the right to spiritually and temporally rule the world of course.

9. Furthermore, the discipline sanctioned by the Church must never be rejected or be branded as contrary to certain principles of natural law. It must never be called crippled, or imperfect or subject to civil authority. In this discipline the administration of sacred rites, standards of morality, and the reckoning of the rights of the Church and her ministers are embraced…………

Click to expand...

It is true that the authentic church of Christ should never be subject to civil authorities, though it should cooperate with them as far as possible save when their policies conflict with a thus saith the Lord. The papacy accepts this rule, as it favors her own authority in any contest. Yet she rejects another biblical rule which is just as important, in attributing to herself that which our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ never taught or exemplified, but only discouraged.

Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Click to expand...

One cannot be on any more intimate terms with this world, than to be the one leading it.

13. Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that “there is one God, one faith, one baptism”[16] may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that “those who are not with Christ are against Him,”[17] and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore “without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.”[18] Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: “He who is for the See of Peter is for me.”[19] A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: “The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?”[20]

Click to expand...

While the above condemnation embraces the false religions of this world, it also embraces all professing followers of Jesus Christ who are not of the Catholic faith. Echoing the infamous declaration of the papal bull Unam Sanctam, -

“Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

Click to expand...

This post to be continued in my next one.

Continuation of my previous post.

14. This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say.[21] When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit”[22] is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.

Click to expand...

That’s right. As soon as the papacy was capable of doing so, she declared open warfare against these United States of America. She attacked one of our most important and basic Protestant principles, liberty of conscience. Supported in a big way by another founding principle of our nation built upon mature Protestant principles of government, separation of church and state. She has been at war with us and all others who support the same ever since.

15. Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again?

Click to expand...

Another direct and immediate attack upon another one of these United States foundational, basic, and fundamental principles. Freedom of speech and the press. Do we not see these freedoms being increasingly jeopardized and threatened the world over as the papacies power and influence increases? Yes we do. A subject which I will gladly enter into more detail examination of in recent years if desired or necessary to the debate at hand.

16. The Church has always taken action to destroy the plague of bad books. This was true even in apostolic times for we read that the apostles themselves burned a large number of books.[23] It may be enough to consult the laws of the fifth Council of the Lateran on this matter and the Constitution which Leo X published afterwards lest “that which has been discovered advantageous for the increase of the faith and the spread of useful arts be converted to the contrary use and work harm for the salvation of the faithful.”[24] This also was of great concern to the fathers of Trent, who applied a remedy against this great evil by publishing that wholesome decree concerning the Index of books which contain false doctrine.[25] “We must fight valiantly,” Clement XIII says in an encyclical letter about the banning of bad books, “as much as the matter itself demands and must exterminate the deadly poison of so many books; for never will the material for error be withdrawn, unless the criminal sources of depravity perish in flames.”[26] Thus it is evident that this Holy See has always striven, throughout the ages, to condemn and to remove suspect and harmful books. The teaching of those who reject the censure of books as too heavy and onerous a burden causes immense harm to the Catholic people and to this See. They are even so depraved as to affirm that it is contrary to the principles of law, and they deny the Church the right to decree and to maintain it.

Click to expand...

Does the above not speak loudly and clearly enough on its own? When she had the power to do so, the papacy commanded the burning of authors she disapproved of, and their books of course. On occasion even burning them along with copies of their own literature. This was not abuse of course, but rather God’s divine will, as the papacy has declared itself the visible representation of, in the place of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Make no mistake about it, many present politically motivated trends of censorship include her support if not inspiration.


The Apostles never commanded book burnings, or even requested such that we know from scripture. This is simply another papal lie to support their own usurped and abusive authority. The one incident recorded in the book of acts, was voluntary action taken on the part of those whose books they were, after their conversion.

17. We have learned that certain teachings are being spread among the common people in writings which attack the trust and submission due to princes; the torches of treason are being lit everywhere. Care must be taken lest the people, being deceived, are led away from the straight path. May all recall, according to the admonition of the apostle that “there is no authority except from God; what authority there is has been appointed by God. Therefore he who resists authority resists the ordinances of God; and those who resist bring on themselves condemnation.”[27] Therefore both divine and human laws cry out against those who strive by treason and sedition to drive the people from confidence in their princes and force them from their government…………

Click to expand...

Which teachings and establishment are founding principles within the Declaration Of Independence and Constitution of these United States of America. The principles of which deny the age old error of princely or royal right to leadership and or submission of the masses by way of birth and or royal or papally approved favor. Rather by more proper way of elected government for and by the people, especially concerning their personal liberties and rights above and over the dictates of unelected religious and political leaders. I will allow for the Encyclical to speak for itself from here on.

19. These beautiful examples of the unchanging subjection to the princes necessarily proceeded from the most holy precepts of the Christian religion. They condemn the detestable insolence and improbity of those who, consumed with the unbridled lust for freedom, are entirely devoted to impairing and destroying all rights of dominion while bringing servitude to the people under the slogan of liberty. Here surely belong the infamous and wild plans of the Waldensians, the Beghards, the Wycliffites, and other such sons of Belial, who were the sores and disgrace of the human race; they often received a richly deserved anathema from the Holy See. For no other reason do experienced deceivers devote their efforts, except so that they, along with Luther, might joyfully deem themselves “free of all.” To attain this end more easily and quickly, they undertake with audacity any infamous plan whatever.

20. Nor can We predict happier times for religion and government from the plans of those who desire vehemently to separate the Church from the state, and to break the mutual concord between temporal authority and the priesthood. It is certain that that concord which always was favorable and beneficial for the sacred and the civil order is feared by the shameless lovers of liberty. ……………………………

23. May Our dear sons in Christ, the princes, support these Our desires for the welfare of Church and State with their resources and authority. May they understand that they received their authority not only for the government of the world, but especially for the defense of the Church. They should diligently consider that whatever work they do for the welfare of the Church accrues to their rule and peace. Indeed let them persuade themselves that they owe more to the cause of the faith than to their kingdom. Let them consider it something very great for themselves as We say with Pope St. Leo, “if in addition to their royal diadem the crown of faith may be added.” Placed as if they were parents and teachers of the people, they will bring them true peace and tranquility, if they take special care that religion and piety remain safe. God, after all, calls Himself “King of kings and Lord of lords.”

24. That all of this may come to pass prosperously and happily, let Us raise Our eyes and hands to the most holy Virgin Mary, who alone crushes all heresies, and is Our greatest reliance and the whole reason for Our hope.[33] May she implore by her patronage a successful outcome for Our plans and actions. Let Us humbly ask of the Prince of the Apostles, Peter and his co-apostle Paul that all of you may stand as a wall lest a foundation be laid other than that which has already been laid. Relying on this happy hope, We trust that the Author and Crown of Our faith Jesus Christ will console Us in all these Our tribulations. We lovingly impart the apostolic benediction to you, venerable brothers, and to the sheep committed to your care as a sign of heavenly aid.

Given in Rome at St. Mary Major, on August 15, the feast of the Assumption of the Virgin, in the year of Our Lord 1832, the second year of Our Pontificate.

Click to expand...

As a matter of fact, future papal Encyclicals slowly changed their tone toward more democratic forms of government, having lost all popular support enough to reestablish kings, queens, princes, and the feudalist governments of Europe. Working instead toward the religious and political unity of all humanity under the thumb of unelected officials of international globalist institutions. With which she has close relations and ever increasing influence. Which would of course place her back in the same type of relationship with these new leaders, which she enjoyed previously, with the kings, queens, and royalty of feudalist Europe in the past. In elitist control by the unelected, of the various often feuding nations of all the earth. Thus her support and attachment to, the globalist agenda of existing elitist international organizations. Which relations I would happy to document for all interested.

The following quote is from the link below. Emphasis is mine.


Which itself is from this link below


Fox's Book of Martyrs. A very pertinent read regarding the OP of the topic.

Summary of the Inquisition​

Of the multitudes who perished by the Inquisoition throughout the world, no authentic record is now discoverable. But wherever popery had power, there was the tribunal. It had been planted even in the east, and the Portuguese Inquisition of Goa was, until within these few years, fed with many an agony. South America was partitioned into provinces of the Inquisition; and with a ghastly mimickry of the crimes of the mother state, the arrivals of viceroys, and the other popular celebrations were thought imperfect without an auto da fe. The Netherlands were one scene of slaughter from the time of the decree which planted the Inquisition among them. In Spain the calculation is more attainable. Each of the seventeen tribunals during a long period burned annually, on an average, ten miserable beings! We are to recollect that this number was in a country where persecution had for ages abolished all religious differences, and where the difficulty was not to find the stake, but the offering. Yet, even in Spain, thus gleaned of all heresy, the Inquisition could still swell its lists of murders to thirty-two thousand! The numbers burned in effigy, or condemned to penance, punishments generally equivalent to exile, confiscation, and taint of blood, to all ruin but the mere loss of worthless life, amounted to three hundred and nine thousand. But the crowds who perished in dungeons of torture, of confinement, and of broken hearts, the millions of dependent lives made utterly helpless, or hurried to the grave by the death of the victims, are beyond all register; or recorded only before HIM, who has sworn that "He that leadeth into captivity, shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword."

Such was the Inquisition, declared by the Spirit of God to be at once the offspring and the image of the popedom. To feel the force of the parentage, we must look to the time. In the thirteenth century, the popedom was at the summit of mortal dominion; it was independent of all kingdoms; it ruled with a rank of influence never before or since possessed by a human scepter; it was the acknowledged sovereign of body and soul; to all earthly intents its power was immeasurable for good or evil. It might have spread literature, peace, freedom, and Christianity to the ends of Europe, or the world. But its nature was hostile; its fuller triumph only disclosed its fuller evil; and, to the shame of human reason, and the terror and suffering of human virtue, Rome, in the hour of its consummate grandeur, teemed with the monstrous and horrid birth of the INQUISITION!

Click to expand...

Amo2 said:

Catholics were forbidden to read and or probably therefore own, any Bible that did not have an official printed or stamped church approval in the beginning, or at the end of the book.

Click to expand...

Which makes sense, because anti-Catholic translations of the Bible such as the Geneva Bible contain inline doctrinal comments which the less educated faithful could confuse with the text itself, and any Bible not produced under ecclesiastical scrutiny might contain errors. Thus it makes sense to limit the versions used by the laity or to discourage the use of unauthorized translations.

When we consider the proliferation of dubious translations like the NRSVue, the New World Translation and others which are edited in such a way as to undermine Christian doctrines related to the Trinity, human sexuality and other issues, the validity of the Roman approach becomes clear.

Now in the Orthodox Church, we lack this restriction, but there are officially sanctioned Bibles, but in English, the Eastern Orthodox have lacked the resources to do their own entirely original translation; the Orthodox Study Bible uses the NKJV with an original translation of the Septuagint. The Copts and Armenians haven’t been able to do this at all and most Copts in the Middle East are using a very unsatisfactory Arabic Bible translated by Protestants which is missing several books used by the Coptic Orthodox Church.

The Syriac Orthodox and the Assyrian Church of the East benefit from the Peshitta, but even among those who speak Aramaic (a majority of Assyrians but a minority of Syriac Orthodox), classical Syriac literacy is limited largely to clergy, leading to use of the flawed Arabic translations. And while there are English translations of the Peshitta, some of them, like the Lamsa Bible, are fundamentally flawed, and others such as the Murdoch and Etheridge, are obscure.

The Ethiopians have been really fortunate in this one respect.

Amo2 said:

The following quote is from the link below. Emphasis is mine.

FOX's Book of Martyrs

Which itself is from this link below

Fox's Book of Martyrs

Fox's Book of Martyrs. A very pertinent read regarding the OP of the topic.

Click to expand...

Fox failed to mention the attrocities committed against Roman Catholics, for example the Martyrs of Gorkum, whose feast was this week, who were the victims of shocking cruelty.

Thus, as a Protestant martyrology his work is acceptable, but reading an account of the period of 1500-1900 without reading the Roman martyrology for the same period results in bias.

The cruelty was made worse by the fact that, as the Roman martyrology states, “agónem suum, adstrictis láqueo fáucibus, consummárunt” - they were hanged with the noose tied around their jaws. Their bodies were also desecrated, in some cases while they were still alive, since hanging in that vicious manner does not produce a quick or painless death.

Thus the message is we should reject all sectarian violence rather than falsely assuming Protestants or indeed Orthodox are incapable of attroticites and preposterously blaming everything on the Roman Catholic Church.

The point of studying the Spanish Inquisition is not that Catholics are uniquely evil, but humans are capable of great evil even when seeking to do good.