Spanish Inquisiton

During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people. It was illegal to translate the Bible into the common languages, even though most people could not read the official Catholic Bible because it was in Latin, a language known only to the highly educated.

Consider some of the laws Rome made against Bible translation. These began to be made in the 13th century and were in effect through the 19th.

Click to expand...

The above quote is from the following link, where a list of the laws mentioned in the above quote may be examined by those interested.

Amo2 said:

For 600 years the Roman Catholic Church attempted to keep vernacular translations of the Bible out of the hands of the people.

Click to expand...

That should read "unauthorised vernacular translations"

Amo2 said:

Not that no Protestants or Orthodoxies either, have never committed such acts.

Click to expand...

The Syriac Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox and the Assyrian Church of the East, by virtue of not ever having been connected to a government, have never possibly been involved in such actions for their entire history.

This also goes for some Eastern Orthodox jurisdictions, which have only ever been persecuted, for example, the Orthodox Church in Alaska (St. Peter the Aleut, martyred, the temple in Sitka looted for its gold after the American purchase of Russia by the US military garrison), the Church of Poland, the Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia, the Church of Albania, the Church of Sinai, and the Church of Cyprus, to name a few.

That being said my main objection is that you have massively overstated the scale of Roman Catholic atrocities (to the point that by your numbers the Roman Catholic Church would have to be responsible for all unnatural death between 1100 and 1200, which is not a viable figure considering that even the combined totals of the genocide of Tamerlane, which wiped out most of the largest church of the 12th century, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the genocides against Armenians, Pontic Greeks and Assyrians in 1915, the Holodymor in the early 1930s (famine in Ukraine caused by Soviet agricultural collectivization) and the Nazi holocaust of WWII).

You have also in separate posts appeared to both accuse them of persecuting the Arians and later of being responsible for the actual Arian persecution of Christians, which is absurd, particularly since the Roman Catholic Church, contrary to what Ellen G. White taught, was a passive participant at the Council of Nicaea, which accepted the decrees of the council; it is believed the two Roman legates proposed making clerical celibacy church-wide, but this was of course voted down since the Eastern churches were content to have married presbyters and deacons, but other than that, and voting with the 316 other Holy Fathers at Nicaea, the Roman legates didn’t do that much - the council primarily concerned the Greek-speaking churches which are now Eastern Orthodox, such as the Church of Alexandria, the Church of Antioch, the Church of Cyprus, the Church of Greece and the Church of Constantinople.

Finally, no authentically Nicene Christian church should be called the harlot of Babylon; this language has no place in ecumenical dialogue. It is incendiary, inappropriate, abrasive and wrong. Indeed we do not know that the harlot of Babylon has any ecclesiastical context at all; I would suspect it is referring to Neo-Platonism and other Pagan religions and to secularism.

A tendency exists upon some members to conflate their interpretation of Scripture with Scripture, but where the meaning of Scripture

prodromos said:

That should read "unauthorised vernacular translations"

Click to expand...

Indeed, and they were right to do so, since in some cases, for example, the Geneva Bible, there were doctrinal notes which directly stated Calvinist doctrinal views about the text.* To be fair, the Challoner Douai Rheims also has these, but its comments agree with Roman Catholic doctrine; if the Calvinists have the right to insert doctrinal comments into their Bible, then so do the Catholics.

*Interestingly, a major reason for the Authorized (King James) Version being commissioned and translated during the reign of King James I was to replace the Geneva Bible and the Bishops’ Bible (the latter being the text on which it is most closely based, which does not as far as I’m aware have doctrinal notes, but apparently it was unacceptable to Scottish Presbyterians for some reason); the KJV lacked doctrinal comments and thus provided a single scriptural text which could be used in both the Church of England and the Church of Scotland despite their considerable theological differences.

Amo2 said:

Which is to ignore the fact that Roman Catholic kings and queens picked up upon enforcing these bans by law, with penalties ranging from fines, to torture and death by burning at the stake.

Click to expand...

Not true.

Having an unauthorized Bible would not make one a target for the Inquisition or the Auto da Fe. They were primarily concerned with conversos who had relapsed to Islam or Judaism. And scholars at major Protestant universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, etc, have established that only around 3,000 people were killed during the entirety of the Spanish Inquisition, contrary to the grossly inflated numbers you presented.

The Liturgist said:

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.

Click to expand...

No actually, it does not make sense to attempt do forbid grown adults from examine issues for themsleves to determine their validity or not. Much better to address them, and explain why they are not valid and or are dishonest, than try to force such issues upon others. Especially concerning human nature, and the tendency of such ill conceived authoritarianism, to attract attention to that which they forbid rather than deflect it.

As already stated several times over though, such attempts of censorship upon members of various religions, amounts to little effect upon personal liberties as long as the civil authorities do not enforce such. Which is itself the real problem and issue. A combined church and state in bed together, forcing their will's upon all. In direct contradiction to God's teaching, and living example.

The historical facts are, that the Church of Rome unquestionably entered into this type of relationship with various nations concerning the topic at hand and many others. In that she accepted, more over did inspire many laws enforced by the state with penalties including and or up to capital punishment. Examples of which have already been supplied on this thread.

Nevertheless here are a few more, with more to come as investigation and time allow. Emphasis in the following quotes is mine.

The pastors recommended to the people the having of the books of the New Testament in their mother-tongue, and pressed the reading thereof with so much care and application, that Raymond, Earl of Toulouse, never stirred any whither without taking that holy book with him. This was the certain badge and mark of all these heretics, and that whereby they defended themselves. For which reason, the Council of Toulouse, fearing lest their croisades should not be able to exterminate the Albigenses, as long as they had the Bible in the vulgar tongue, took care to prohibit the having of it in these terms;

“We prohibit the permission of the books of the Old and New Testament to laymen, except perhaps they might desire to have the Psalter, or some Breviary for the divine service, or the Hours of the blessed Virgin Mary, for devotion; expressly forbidding their having the other parts of the Bible translated into the vulgar tongue.” ( Remarks Upon The Ecclesiastical History Of The Ancient Churches Of The Albigenses by Peter Allix D.D Page 525 )

Click to expand...

The king was still a prisoner; the regent and Duprat, who were opposed to the Reformation, wielded supreme power; the priests, seeing the importance of the moment, united all their efforts to combat the evangelical influences, and obtained a brilliant triumph. On Monday, the 5th of February, 1526, a month before the return of Francis I., the sound of the trumpet was heard in all the public places of Paris, and a little later

in those of Sens, Orleans, Auxerre, Meaux, Tours, Bourges, Angers, Poitiers, Troyes, Lyons, and Macon, and ‘in all the bailiwicks, seneschallies, provestries, viscounties, and estates of the realm.’ When the trumpet ceased, the herald cried by order of parliament: ‘All persons are forbidden to put up to sale or translate from Latin into French the epistles of St. Paul, the Apocalypse, and other books. Henceforward no printer shall print any of the books of Luther. No one shall speak of the ordinances of the Church or of images, otherwise than holy Church ordains All books of the Holy Bible, translated into French, shall be given up by those who possess them, and carried within a week to the clerks of the court. All prelates, priests, and their curates shall forbid their parishioners to have the least doubt of the Catholic faith.’ Translations, books, explanations, and even doubts were prohibited. ( History Of The Reformation In The Time Of Calvin Vol. 1 by J.H. Merle d’Aubigne Pages 323&324)

Click to expand...

ROME’S FIGHT

Rome was awake to the inevitable result of allowing the common people to read the Bible, and the Vicar of Croydon declared in a speech at St. Paul’s Cross, London: “We must destroy the printing press, or it will destroy us”-” The Printing-Press and the Gospel,” by E. R. Palmer, p. 24. The papal machinery was therefore set in motion for the destruction of the Bible. “There now began a remarkable contest between the Romish Church and the Bible-between the printers and the popes .... “To the Bible the popes at once declared a deathless hostility. To read the Scriptures was in their eyes the grossest of crimes .... The Inquisition was invested with new terrors, and was forced upon France and Holland by papal armies. The Jesuits were everywhere distinguished by their hatred for the Bible. In the Netherlands they led the persecutions of Alva and Philip II; they rejoiced with a dreadful joy when Antwerp, Bruges, and Ghent, the fairest cities of the workingmen, were reduced to pauperism and ruin by the Spanish arms; for the Bible had perished with its defenders .... “To burn Bibles was the favorite employment of zealous Catholics. Wherever they were found the heretical volumes were destroyed by active Inquisitors, and thousands of Bibles and Testaments perished in every part of France”-” (Historical Studies,” Eugene Lawrence, pp. 254-257.)

Click to expand...

In Spain, not only were the common people forbidden to read the Bible, but also university professors were forbidden by the “Supreme Council” of the Inquisition to possess their valuable Bible manuscripts. “The council, in consequence, decreed that those theologians in the university who had studied the original languages, should be obliged, as well as other persons, to give up their Hebrew and Greek Bibles to the commissaries of the holy office, on pain of excommunication”-”(History of the Inquisition of Spain,” D. J. A. Llorente, Secretary of the Inquisition, p. 105. London, I827.) “In 1490, Torquemada [the Inquisitor-General] caused many Hebrew Bibles and more than six thousand volumes to be burnt in an Auto da fe at Salamanca”-”(Literary Policy of the Church of Rome,” Joseph Mendham, M. A., p. 97. London, 1830.)

Click to expand...

How many thousands of invaluable manuscripts thus perished in the flames of the Inquisition, eternity alone will reveal. It is exceedingly difficult for a Protestant in our days to fathom the extent of this fear of and enmity against the Bible, manifested by the Roman church. With her it was actually a life or death struggle! A person must read the history of the Inquisition, and examine the Roman Indexes of Forbidden Books to understand her viewpoint. Inquisitor General Perez del Pr gave expression to her feelings and her bitter lament when he declared in horror “‘that some individuals had carried the audacity to the execrable extremity of demanding permission to the Holy Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, without fearing to counter mortal poison therein”-”(History of the Inquisition of Spain,” D. Juan Antonio Llorente, p. 111.)

Click to expand...

The funeral piles were lit all over Europe. Samuel Smiles says of France: “Bibles and New Testaments were seized wherever found and burnt; but more Bibles and Testaments seemed to rise, by magic, from their ashes. The printers who were convicted of printing Bibles were next seized and burnt. The Bourgeois de Paris [a Roman Catholic paper] gives a detailed account of human sacrifices offered up to ignorance and intolerance in the city during the six months ending June, 1534, from which it appears that twenty men and one woman were burnt alive.. In the beginning of the following year, the Sorbonne obtained from the king an ordinance, which was promulgated on 26th of February, 1535, for the suppression of printing! (Huguenots,” Samuel Smiles, pp. 20, 21, and first footnote.)

Click to expand...

“Further attempts continued to be made by Rome to check the progress of printing. In 1599 [1559] Pope Paul IV issued the first Index Expurgatorius, containing a list of the books expressly prohibited by the Church. It included all Bibles printed in modern languages, of which forty-eight editions were enumerated; while sixty-one printers were put under a general ban”-(Id., p. 23.)

Click to expand...

The Liturgist said:

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.

Martyrs of Gorkum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

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.

Click to expand...

The “Martyrs of Gorkum” may be more the victims of war, than the typical martyr one imagines when considering the term. True enough, they were not given proper trials as a great many Protestants of the time leading up to and after that event were, right before they were abused and or executed for their differing religious beliefs by Catholic clergy, magistrates, and executioners. This is not to mention the very many Protestants of the time that also received no proper trials during the many persecutions leading up to and after the “Martyrs of Gorkum” event. This topic is very connected to this thread as well, in that Spanish Inquisitors were very active in these persecutions of Protestants in the Netherlands leading up to and after Gorkum event. So as to understand, that the Spanish Inquisition took place in many nations or areas, other than Spain. This fact of course adding a great many more victims to the Spanish Inquisition, than the already extremely underestimated numbers being foisted upon us on this thread concerning just Spain. Just a few following facts and details of which, will clarify and justify this claim. Emphasis in the following quotes is mine. Emphasis in all following quotes is mine.


https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Eighty_Years'_War#cite_note-Kamen-1

………………………………………….


Protestantism


During the sixteenth century Protestantism rapidly gained ground in northern Europe. The Netherlands were not predominantly Protestant in the 1560s, but Protestants, mainly of the Reformed branch (followers of John Calvin constituted a significant minority and were tolerated by local authorities. In a society dependent on trade, freedom and tolerance were considered essential. Charles V and Philip II, however, felt it was their duty to fight Protestantism, which led to increasing grievances in the Netherlands. In the second half of the century, the situation escalated. Philip sent troops and the hard Spanish repression turned the initial revolt into a fight for complete independence. Some Dutch Protestants called Philip the anti-christ, giving a distinctive religious stamp to rebellion against him (see Phillips 2005, 230).


The Dutch compared their more austere and thrifty Calvinist values favorably with the luxurious habits of Spain’s Catholic nobility. Symbolic stories from the New Testament, featuring fishermen, shipbuilders and simple occupations resonated among the Dutch. The Calvinist movement emphasized Christian virtues of modesty, cleanliness, frugality and hard work. The Protestant, Calvinist elements of the rebellion represented a moral challenge to the Spanish Empire.


……………………………………….


Initial stages (1568-1572)


Iconoclasm and repression


On Assumption of the Virgin feast day in 1566 (usually marked a procession of a statue of Mary the mother of Jesus Christ), a small incident outside the Antwerp cathedral started a massive iconoclastic movement by the Calvinists. In the wake of the incident on August 15, they stormed the churches in the Netherlands and destroyed statues and images of Roman Catholic saints. According to Calvinist beliefs, statues represented the worship of false idols, which they believed to be heretical practices. Outraged at this desecration of his faith's churches, and fearing loss of control of the region, Philip II saw no other option than to send an army. In 1567 Fernando Álvarez de Toledo, 3rd Duke of Alba, marched into Brussels at the head of ten thousand troops.


The Duke of Alba had the counts of Egmont and Horne arrested for high treason, and the next year on June 5, 1568, they were decapitated on the Grand Place in Brussels. The Count of Egmont was a general and statesman of Flanders who came from one of the richest and most influential families in the Netherlands. He was Phillip II's cousin through his mother's side. The Count of Horne was a stadtholder (an official representative) of Guelders and an admiral of Flanders. In 1559 he commanded the stately fleet that conveyed Philip II from the Netherlands to Spain. Egmont and Horne were Catholic nobles who were loyal to the king of Spain until their death, and their executions were carried out because Alba considered they had been too tolerant towards Protestantism. Their death provoked outrage throughout the Netherlands. No fewer than 18,000 people were executed in the following six years of his governorship, according to some reports.[1] The events earned Alba the nickname "the Iron Duke."

Click to expand...

Heritage History - Products

Revolt of the Netherlands


1566 to 1609
Protestant Netherlands — versus — Catholic Spain


The Revolt of the Netherlands against the Spanish Crown was driven by economic and political concerns as well as religious ones, but it was the religious conflict between uncompromising parties that proved intractable. The original object of the rebellion was neither to break entirely from the Hapsburg Empire, or to establish a Protestant republic. The vast majority of the population and most of the leaders of the rebellion were faithful Catholics who only wanted a halt to the oppressions of the Spanish army, a relief from burdensome taxation, and a more tolerant approach to "heretics". Had the Spanish crown relented on these demands they may well have held these territories. Instead they took a hard line, and were met with an equally fanatical opposition.


The Dutch Revolt was a long, drawn out war. The most famous portion of it, by far, was the early years when the Prince of Orange led a small band of determined rebels against the Duke of Alva, the "iron-fisted" governor of the region. But Alba only ruled for six years, and William was assassinated in 1584, yet the war continued for many years thereafter. A truce was reached in 1609, forty years since the beginning of hostilities, but the conflict simmered and was reignited by the events of the Thirty Years War A final resolution did not come until all of Europe was exhausted by the struggle at the Peace of Westphalia in 1648.


Prelude : 1556-1566


In the years before the Netherland revolt, three things happened which led up to the crisis. First, ideas of religious independence inspired by the Protestant Reformation were becoming increasingly influential, especially among the wealthy and independent merchant classes of the region. Second, Philip II replaced his father Charles V as head of the Hapsburg empire and his authoritarian style was resented by the local nobles. The Netherlands were a cosmopolitan, commercial-based society whose major towns had long enjoyed privileges of self-rule and they resented his authoritarian style. Thirdly, Spanish soldiers, who had recently been at war with France, were stationed in the Netherlands, and the provinces were taxed to support them. This was a source of great irritation throughout the Lowlands, particularly since many of the Netherland's trading partners were enemies of Spain (i.e., France, Turkey, England).


The oppressions of Spain against the Protestants in the Netherlands began shortly after the Franco-Spanish conflict known as the Italian War of 1551-1559, came to a close. Philip II had recently come to the throne of Spain, and he appointed a controversial minister to step up the effort to root-out the Calvinist heresy. Cardinal Granvelle was unpopular, and several important Catholic nobles, including the Count of Egmont, the Count of Hoorn, and the Prince of Orange opposed his harsh measures, although they themselves were faithful Catholic aristocrats. Egmont, in particular, was a national hero and even Margaret of Parma, governor of the Netherland and half-sister to Philip II, was sympathetic to the Dutch nationals.


Instead of acquiescing to the demands of these nobles, however, Philip II withdrew Granvelle and appointed the even harsher Duke of Alva as governor, with the goal of crushing any rebellion with an iron hand.


Early Years of the Rebellion—Alva, Requesens, and Don John of Austria : 1567-78


The most famous period of the Dutch Revolt was undoubtedly the early years, when the notorious Duke of Alva ruthlessly sought to root out rebellion in the Spanish Netherlands and William the Silent rose as a national hero to stand against him. During this period the character of the struggle changed considerably, from a disorganized series of minor local uprisings, to a region-wide united rebellion. The incidents of this period are often portrayed, especially by Protestant historians, as a heroic period wherein small bands of Calvinist martyrs stood bravely against oppressive Catholic tyranny in order to uphold the ideals of religious liberty. While there is much basis for this, the whole truth is somewhat more complex.


The first skirmishes of the Dutch revolt were simply Spanish attacks on minority communities which harbored Calvinist 'heretics'. The opposition was not united at this point, and national sympathies were not yet aroused in support of the rebels. The Calvinist heresy was indeed spreading in the region, but the vast majority were still Catholics with no particular sympathy for the cause of religious freedom. It was not until the Duke of Alva was appointed governor and immediately arrested and executed the Catholic noblemen Count Hoorn and Count Egmont that popular indignation became widespread. In 1568, William the Silent and his brother Louis of Nassau attempted a rebellion, but they were soon defeated—Louis killed and William exiled. In the following years Alva put down all opposition with such ferocity that open rebellions ceased, but Calvinist ideas, resentment of the Spanish, and hatred of Alva continued to spread…………………………..

Click to expand...

The above accounts of the history under examination reveal the atmosphere of persecution and war that was prevalent in the many years surrounding the “Martyrs of Gorkum” event. A far different scenario than the suffering of martyrs throughout history simply due to authoritarian and abusive government. This is not to condone any unjust actions on either side of the issue, but simply to point out the unavoidable civilian casualties of war between nations and or civil wars within nations. Both sides viewing each other’s as a deadly threat, and rightly so, leading to poor judgment and or violent actions including murder. Nevertheless, the underlying cause of all such from either side, being truly void of any authentically Christian motive. All at the very least empowered if not fully instigated by, a united authoritarian form of amalgamated church and state. Which also has nothing at all to do with authentic Christianity.


As is obvious from the above testimony which includes an account of 18000 executions within just six years, the number of deaths due to the Inquisition and issues of severe religious intolerance, are being greatly deflated by some on these boards. If they be true, along with a great many more accounts throughout recorded history as well. Most of which we have not even begun to touch upon, but most certainly will as time allows.


It should be keenly noted from the above account as well, that the authoritarian clergy and nobility of the Roman Church State, had no problem executing Roman Catholic’s themselves. They executed two very prominent leaders of their own, simply because they were considered to be to tolerant toward Protestants. Many of whom themselves it is important not to forget, were excommunicated Catholics who no longer agreed with certain and various teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Based largely upon a new and greater understanding of what the holy scriptures themselves actually teach. Nevertheless, the greater part no doubt of the 18000 executions recorded in the above historical account, were in fact declared and or professed Protestants. Which almost without question, played a heavy part in the execution of the Roman Catholics of Gorinchem, without a trial. Believed to be a retaliatory strike no doubt, by the perpetrators who felt extremely threatened and rightly so, by overly authoritarian religious and political leaders who had already unjustly wiped out many of their own.


As usual, freedom and liberty of conscience were key issues being addressed and or demanded by those involved. Which Roman Catholic religious and political leadership have infamously denied many, throughout their history. Being conceived, nurtured, supported, and finally mandated by Imperial order, the right of which it continued to defend during much of its history. While continuing to this day, to be intricately entangled with authoritative international political organizations composed of unelected officials wishing to impose their rule over sovereign nations and peoples. The proof of which I will be happy to provide for any interested. In another new topic in any case. Much more to come as time allows on this thread, concerning the topics at hand.

More history regarding the persecution of Protestants in the Netherlands leading eventually up to the 30 and or 80 years war. All those who died in these religious wars and many others, were also victims to be added to the immense numbers who have died throughout history which many historians have referred to. From the time of the first apostate “Christian” sects vying for Imperial favor and power during the days of Constantine, who also violently attacked and killed each other, to all of the abuses and murders tied to the establishment or maintenance of the same throughout history. Emphasis in the following quote is mine.

THE HISTORY OF PROTESTANTISM
VOL. 3
by Rev. J. A. Wylie
BOOK 18.​

HISTORY OF PROTESTANTISM IN THE NETHERLANDS.

CHAPTER 2.

INTRODUCTION OF PROTESTANTISM INTO THE NETHERLANDS.

We have already seen with what fierce defiance Charles V. flung down the
gage of battle to Protestantism. In manner the most public, and with vow
the most solemn and awful, he bound himself to extirpate heresy, or to
lose armies, treasures, kingdoms, body and soul, in the attempt. Germany,
happily, was covered from the consequences of that mortal threat by the
sovereign rights of its hereditary princes, who stood between their
subjects and that terrible arm that was now uplifted to crush them. But the
less fortunate Netherlands enjoyed no such protection. Charles was master
there. He could enforce his will in his patrimonial estates, and his will was
that no one in all the Netherlands should profess another than the Roman
creed.

One furious edict was issued after another, and these were publicly read
twice every year, that no one might pretend ignorance. These edicts did
not remain a dead letter as in Germany; they were ruthlessly executed, and
soon, alas! the Low Countries were blazing with stakes and swimming in
blood. It is almost incredible, and yet the historian Meteren asserts that
during the last thirty years of Charles’s reign not fewer than 50,000
Protestants were put to death in the provinces of the Netherlands.
Grotius, in his Annals, raises the number to 100,000. Even granting that
these estimates are extravagant, still they are sufficient to convince us that
the number of victims was great indeed. The bloody work did not slacken
owing to Charles’s many absences in Spain and other countries. His sister
Margaret, Dowager-queen of Hungary, who was appointed regent of the
provinces, was compelled to carry out all his cruel edicts. Men and
women, whose crime was that they did not believe in the mass, were
beheaded, hanged, burned, or buried alive. These proceedings were
zealously seconded by the divines of Louvain, whom Luther styled
“bloodthirsty heretics, who, teaching impious doctrines which they could
make good neither by reason nor Scripture, They betook themselves to force,
and disputed with fire and sword. This terrible work went on from the
23rd of July, 1523, when the proto-martyrs of the provinces were burned
in the great square of Brussels, to the day of the emperor’s abdication.
The Dowager-queen, in a letter to her brother, had given it as her opinion
that the good work of purgation should stop only when to go farther
would be to effect the entire depopulation of the country. The “Christian
Widow,” as Erasmus styled her, would not go the length of burning the
last Netherlander; she would leave a few orthodox inhabitants to repeople
the land.

Meanwhile the halter and the axe were gathering their victims so fast, that
the limits traced by the regent — -wide as they were — bade fair soon to
be reached. The genius and activity of the Netherlanders were succumbing
to the terrible blows that were being unremittingly dealt them. Agriculture
was beginning to languish; life was departing from the great towns; the
step of the artisan, as he went to and returned from his factory at the
hours of meal, was less elastic, and his eye less bright; the workshops
were being weeded of their more skillful workmen; foreign Protestant
merchants were fleeing from the country; and the decline of the internal
trade kept pace with that of the external commerce.

It was evident to all whom bigotry had not rendered incapable of
reflection, that, though great progress had been made towards the ruin of
the country, the extinction of heresy was still distant, and likely to be
reached only when the land had become a desert, the harbours empty, and
the cities silent. The blood with which the tyrant was so profusely
watering the Netherlands, was but nourishing the heresy which he sought
to drown.(Pgs. 20&21)

Click to expand...

The Liturgist said:

The Syriac Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox and the Assyrian Church of the East, by virtue of not ever having been connected to a government, have never possibly been involved in such actions for their entire history.

This also goes for some Eastern Orthodox jurisdictions, which have only ever been persecuted, for example, the Orthodox Church in Alaska (St. Peter the Aleut, martyred, the temple in Sitka looted for its gold after the American purchase of Russia by the US military garrison), the Church of Poland, the Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia, the Church of Albania, the Church of Sinai, and the Church of Cyprus, to name a few.

That being said my main objection is that you have massively overstated the scale of Roman Catholic atrocities (to the point that by your numbers the Roman Catholic Church would have to be responsible for all unnatural death between 1100 and 1200, which is not a viable figure considering that even the combined totals of the genocide of Tamerlane, which wiped out most of the largest church of the 12th century, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the genocides against Armenians, Pontic Greeks and Assyrians in 1915, the Holodymor in the early 1930s (famine in Ukraine caused by Soviet agricultural collectivization) and the Nazi holocaust of WWII).

You have also in separate posts appeared to both accuse them of persecuting the Arians and later of being responsible for the actual Arian persecution of Christians, which is absurd, particularly since the Roman Catholic Church, contrary to what Ellen G. White taught, was a passive participant at the Council of Nicaea, which accepted the decrees of the council; it is believed the two Roman legates proposed making clerical celibacy church-wide, but this was of course voted down since the Eastern churches were content to have married presbyters and deacons, but other than that, and voting with the 316 other Holy Fathers at Nicaea, the Roman legates didn’t do that much - the council primarily concerned the Greek-speaking churches which are now Eastern Orthodox, such as the Church of Alexandria, the Church of Antioch, the Church of Cyprus, the Church of Greece and the Church of Constantinople.

Finally, no authentically Nicene Christian church should be called the harlot of Babylon; this language has no place in ecumenical dialogue. It is incendiary, inappropriate, abrasive and wrong. Indeed we do not know that the harlot of Babylon has any ecclesiastical context at all; I would suspect it is referring to Neo-Platonism and other Pagan religions and to secularism.

A tendency exists upon some members to conflate their interpretation of Scripture with Scripture, but where the meaning of Scripture

Click to expand...

I'll have to take your word for it, regarding orthodoxy. Regarding the rest of your accusations, this is exactly what we disagree upon, and contest regarding each others views. We simply do not and likely will not agree, as many in the past have not as well. As the continued quotes form many that I will continue to supply as time affords, clearly reveal. Nor will I be persuaded to stop associating "Christian" entities which enter into unholy unions with the kings or leaders of this earth, with Babylon the great. As I consider the holy scriptures themselves, to be of much greater authority and authenticity than you,, and or anyone else for that matter.

Rev 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great harlot that sitteth upon many waters: 2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. 3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: 5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

Click to expand...

Professed "Christian" entities which are in cahoots with the governments of this world resulting in persecutions and the death of even other professed Christians, are most obviously in illicit relationships with the kings of this earth. Practicing and teaching that which is completely out of line with the teachings and living example of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Who is God, and therefore could have and can force compliance to all that He wishes whenever He wishes. All therefore who would raise themselves even above God Himself in doing so, are in fact verily antichrist. Since also this is always done by, through, and or with the cooperation the kings and governments of this world, they are also part of if not Babylon the Great themselves. As so very many have rightly identified them throughout history.

The Liturgist said:

Not true.

Having an unauthorized Bible would not make one a target for the Inquisition or the Auto da Fe. They were primarily concerned with conversos who had relapsed to Islam or Judaism. And scholars at major Protestant universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, etc, have established that only around 3,000 people were killed during the entirety of the Spanish Inquisition, contrary to the grossly inflated numbers you presented.

Click to expand...

Here is what is true, one of us is most certainly wrong, at the very least. As is the usual case in many disagreements, we place our faiths in very different and obviously opposing perceived authorities. There are many testimonies which contradict your above accusation, which I have and will continue to provide for all to examine for themselves. With a lot more references enabling others to examine the issues for themselves than you have provided above and or to date.

Please do provide more accurate or detailed references concerning your accusations above, that they may be examined for accuracy and or origin, as I have already requested once before I do believe. Thank you.

Amo2 said:

a few following facts and details of which, will clarify and justify this claim. Emphasis in the following quotes is mine. Emphasis in all following quotes is mine.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but that’s not a credible source - the New World Encyclopedia is a publication of the Unification Church (the Moonies), whose now deceased leader was a heresiarch who falsely claimed to be Jesus Christ.

Even biased works like the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia (which is not an official publication of the Roman Catholic Church and is regarded as obsolete by Catholic scholars; its main use is it provides very good documentation of Catholic liturgical practices and organizational infrastructure as they existed in the first decades of the 20th century) are inherently more reliable, since they’re actually written by Christians.

If you’re going to quote from sources like the New World Encyclopedia, rather than serious academic sources such as the Cambridge History of Christianity, I have no choice but to regard that as an appeal to unqualified authority, since any publication by the Moonies must be closely scrutinized for historical accuracy. The Unification Church is a dangerous cult, whose activities in Japan were exposed following the tragic assasination of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe by a man whose family had been brainwashed into giving all their money to the Unification Church.

Now, I’m going to assume you‘re not a member of the Unification Church and agree with myself and other members of the site that he was not Jesus Christ, and that the views of his cult are entirely incompatible with the Nicene Creed and the other parts of the Christian Forums Statement of Faith; if this is not the case, please let us know so that we don’t waste further time on this discussion.

Amo2 said:

Please do provide more accurate or detailed references concerning your accusations above, that they may be examined for accuracy and or origin, as I have already requested once before I do believe. Thank you.

Click to expand...

Firstly, I haven’t accused you of anything. Stating that a claim you’ve made is inaccurate and providing correct information is not an accusation, but rather a clarification or correction. It is not immoral to unknowingly post inaccurate information. For example, if you did not know that the New World Encyclopedia was affiliated with the Moonies, and were relying on it and other false sources for your information, you’re not responsible, because you received inaccurate information, and many people who haven’t studied the history of the Christian church in an academic or otherwise unbiased context, and who aren’t aware of how to screen for peer reviewed publications, might inadvertently make use of such material. Furthermore, the people who wrote the inaccurate material in most cases probably believed it. Many people do not understand what confirmation bias is, or how to do objective research and how to apply critical thinking, or are reticent to do so with regards to religious issues, although the Christian faith will stand up to objective scrutiny (but some views of some denominations can be shown to be inaccurate, and other aspects of the Christian faith to have to be taken on faith, but there is a difference between that which is unproven and that which is demonstrably false.

I want to assure you I would not accuse you of anything, because to do so would be abrasive and inflammatory, and could constitute an argumentum ad hominem.


At any rate, I have provided numerous sources throughout this thread as have other users such as our friends @tall73 @prodromos @Valletta @boughtwithaprice @JSRG and other users. Why don’t you begin with those, and if you want additional information on something more specific, then get back to us?

For example, regarding the history of the Spanish Inquisition, you could review The Cambridge History of Christianity (volumes 5 through 7), which should also address the persecution of Catholics by Protestant states.

Amo2 said:

The “Martyrs of Gorkum” may be more the victims of war, than the typical martyr one imagines when considering the term.

Click to expand...

I can’t understand your reasoning for making such a claim, since we are not talking about soldiers on the battlefield or people killed as collateral damage, but rather clerics who were arrested and then brutally executed for their Catholic faith.

There’s no distinction - if we are talking about people not actively engaged in fighting a war, but who were simply practicing the Roman Catholic religion, who were martyred specifically for refusing to renounce their Roman Catholic faith, which is the case with the martyrs of Gorkum, they are martyrs.

It’s not like we’re talking about men in arms who died on the battlefield in the Wars of Religion, or villagers who perished when their village was attacked for military reasons not related to the prevailing faith of the inhabitants (for example, a village occupying a strategically important position).

A martyr is someone who is killed specifically for refusing to renounce their faith, and the Martyrs of Gorkum unambiguously fit this definition.

To validate this position, let’s poll some additional Orthodox members, who being neither Roman Catholic nor Protestant, and who are members of an ancient church that was in no respect involved in the Wars of Religion, and ask them whether they regard the Martyrs of Gorkum as being victims of war or people who were killed for their religious beliefs, such as my friends @prodromos and @jas3

I would urge you to recognize the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, who have been victims of both Roman Catholic and Protestant persecution, but who still love both, and have been persecuted far more by Islam and Communism, as a neutral voice in this thread, that is concerned with objectivity and with promoting love and reconciliation.

Amo2 said:

ROME’S FIGHT

Rome was awake to the inevitable result of allowing the common people to read the Bible, and the Vicar of Croydon declared in a speech at St. Paul’s Cross, London: “We must destroy the printing press, or it will destroy us”-” The Printing-Press and the Gospel,” by E. R. Palmer, p. 24. The papal machinery was therefore set in motion for the destruction of the Bible. “There now began a remarkable contest between the Romish Church and the Bible-between the printers and the popes .... “To the Bible the popes at once declared a deathless hostility. To read the Scriptures was in their eyes the grossest of crimes .... The Inquisition was invested with new terrors, and was forced upon France and Holland by papal armies. The Jesuits were everywhere distinguished by their hatred for the Bible. In the Netherlands they led the persecutions of Alva and Philip II; they rejoiced with a dreadful joy when Antwerp, Bruges, and Ghent, the fairest cities of the workingmen, were reduced to pauperism and ruin by the Spanish arms; for the Bible had perished with its defenders .... “To burn Bibles was the favorite employment of zealous Catholics. Wherever they were found the heretical volumes were destroyed by active Inquisitors, and thousands of Bibles and Testaments perished in every part of France”-” (Historical Studies,” Eugene Lawrence, pp. 254-257.)

Click to expand...

Realize that the Catholic Church not only chose the 73 books of the Bible in the late 300s, but preserved, translated, and preached the Word of God over all of these centuries. Let me address alleged and undated comments by some unnamed vicar of Croydon, in London. As to England and Biblical text translations into English, Venerable Bede, a Catholic monk, is perhaps best known for his translation in the 700s. Catholic King Alfred the Great had not finished his translation of Psalms before he died, that would have been in the 800s. Now a lot of Biblical texts by Catholics have been destroyed, remember Protestants in England seized Catholic monasteries and gave the land to wealthy Protestants and much that was Catholic was sold off or destroyed. But some do exist, you can find some of Alfred’s translations in a manuscript dated as around 1050. These are in the English of the Saxons: The Illustrated Psalms of Alfred the Great: The Old English Paris Psalter When the Normans took over the English changed, the paraphrase of Orm is dated around 1150 and is an example of a Catholic translation into Middle English. When a Catholic named Gutenberg printed the first book on the printing press, of course the first book he printed was the Bible. It is known as the Gutenberg Bibles. Catholics who fled to France after the takeover of Protestantism in England were able to publish an English version of the Bible and efforts, at great peril, were made by Catholics to get an English version of that Bible, the Douay-Rheims, to the people of England. The Rheims New Testament was published in the year 1582, and the entire Bible was finished in 1609. The Protestant King James Bible, based much upon Catholic work, was published in 1611.

The Liturgist said:

I can’t understand your reasoning for making such a claim, since we are not talking about soldiers on the battlefield or people killed as collateral damage, but rather clerics who were arrested and then brutally executed for their Catholic faith.

There’s no distinction - if we are talking about people not actively engaged in fighting a war, but who were simply practicing the Roman Catholic religion, who were martyred specifically for refusing to renounce their Roman Catholic faith, which is the case with the martyrs of Gorkum, they are martyrs.

It’s not like we’re talking about men in arms who died on the battlefield in the Wars of Religion, or villagers who perished when their village was attacked for military reasons not related to the prevailing faith of the inhabitants (for example, a village occupying a strategically important position).

A martyr is someone who is killed specifically for refusing to renounce their faith, and the Martyrs of Gorkum unambiguously fit this definition.

To validate this position, let’s poll some additional Orthodox members, who being neither Roman Catholic nor Protestant, and who are members of an ancient church that was in no respect involved in the Wars of Religion, and ask them whether they regard the Martyrs of Gorkum as being victims of war or people who were killed for their religious beliefs, such as my friends @prodromos and @jas3

I would urge you to recognize the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, who have been victims of both Roman Catholic and Protestant persecution, but who still love both, and have been persecuted far more by Islam and Communism, as a neutral voice in this thread, that is concerned with objectivity and with promoting love and reconciliation.

Click to expand...

You are describing exactly what Catholics did to Protestants in the Netherlands by the thousands before the Martyrs of Gorkum incident in the Netherlands, as described in the histories I shared. When Protestants began to do the same thing to Catholics in a retaliatory manner no doubt, these were the beginnings of war. More specifically the 30 and or 80 year wars. It is harder to declare oneself a martyr, when the denomination you belong to is actively involved in murdering thousands of the people who end up murdering you, no doubt in retaliation for the atrocities your denomination has been committing. Which persecutions of course you deny, which is why you would not understand what I am talking about. If my denomination starts persecuting and murdering people, guess what, I'm going to leave my denomination. If I don't, and end up getting killed by those of the people my denomination which I refuse to leave has been persecuting and killing, I would not consider myself to be a martyr. Certainly not in the authentically Christian sense, as my Lord Jesus was.

Of course who were these Catholics killing, but other Roman Catholics who left the faith, or were excommunicated because they no longer agreed with Roman Catholic teachings. Anyone can be a martyr I suppose, for any cause or religion. I do not consider people who died supporting a religion which forces itself upon others, persecuting and or killing those who refuse, a Christian Martyr. You may do as you wish of course. Nevertheless, we have no example regarding our Lord or His apostles dying while teaching or supporting any such worldly actions.

Valletta said:

Realize that the Catholic Church not only chose the 73 books of the Bible in the late 300s, but preserved, translated, and preached the Word of God over all of these centuries. Let me address alleged and undated comments by some unnamed vicar of Croydon, in London. As to England and Biblical text translations into English, Venerable Bede, a Catholic monk, is perhaps best known for his translation in the 700s. Catholic King Alfred the Great had not finished his translation of Psalms before he died, that would have been in the 800s. Now a lot of Biblical texts by Catholics have been destroyed, remember Protestants in England seized Catholic monasteries and gave the land to wealthy Protestants and much that was Catholic was sold off or destroyed. But some do exist, you can find some of Alfred’s translations in a manuscript dated as around 1050. These are in the English of the Saxons: The Illustrated Psalms of Alfred the Great: The Old English Paris Psalter When the Normans took over the English changed, the paraphrase of Orm is dated around 1150 and is an example of a Catholic translation into Middle English. When a Catholic named Gutenberg printed the first book on the printing press, of course the first book he printed was the Bible. It is known as the Gutenberg Bibles. Catholics who fled to France after the takeover of Protestantism in England were able to publish an English version of the Bible and efforts, at great peril, were made by Catholics to get an English version of that Bible, the Douay-Rheims, to the people of England. The Rheims New Testament was published in the year 1582, and the entire Bible was finished in 1609. The Protestant King James Bible, based much upon Catholic work, was published in 1611.

Click to expand...

The Catholic Church you belong to, did not even exist in the 300s. The church at that time, wished to get the word of God out to as many as possible, in an understood language. Which was the purpose of Jerome's vulgate addition if I remember correctly. Where did you copy and paste the above information from please.

Amo2 said:

The Catholic Church you belong to, did not even exist in the 300s. The church at that time, wished to get the word of God out to as many as possible, in an understood language. Which was the purpose of Jerome's vulgate addition if I remember correctly. Where did you copy and paste the above information from please.

Click to expand...

In Europe, Latin eventually surpassed Greek as the common, or "vulgar," language of the people, thus the Latin "Vulgate." As century after century passed Latin morphed into languages like Italian and French and Spanish, hence the need by the Catholic Church for more translations.

More quotes from various sources regarding Rome's attempts to squelch bibles written without their approval. Emphasis is mine.

FORGING NEW WEAPONS

The Roman church had discovered that the root of her troubles lay in the reading of the Bible by the laity, and had opposed it with all the power at her command, But she finally realized that her open war on the Scriptures had aroused suspicion that her life and doctrines were out of harmony with God’s word, and could not endure the light of an open Bible. To allay such feelings she must make it appear that she was not opposed to the Scriptures, but only to the “erroneous Protestant Bible.” But how could such an impression be mad when that Bible was a faithful translation of the Hebrew and Greek texts, in which the Scriptures were originally written. Then too, the Protestants had, at that time, some of the more able Hebrew and Greek scholars in all Christendom. Providence had brought the Reformers in contact with more of the best sources of Bible manuscripts:

(1) When the Turks captured Constantinople in 1453, many of the Greek scholars fled to the West, bringing with them their valuable manuscripts from the East where Christianity originated, and then Greek and Hebrew learning revived in the West.*

(2) With this influence from the East came also the Syrian Bible, us’ed by the earl church at Antioch in Syria (Acts 11:26), which was translate directly from the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts long before the Massoretic (O.T.) text, and is the oldest known Bible mare script (unless it should be the one lately discovered by Chester Beatty.

(3) During their severe persecutions the Waldensens, came into contact with the Reformers at Geneva, and thus the Bible, which had been preserved in its purity from the days of the apostles, was brought to the Reformers.

Translations direct from the original languages in which the Holy Scriptures were written, and comparisons with ancient sources, by men of high scholarly ability and sterling integrity, gave the Protestants a perfectly reliable Bible. In spite of these plain facts, the Catholic authorities had to do something to turn the minds of their people away from the Protestant Bible, so widely distributed. They therefore advanced the claim that Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation was more correct than any copy we now have of the original Hebrew and Greek texts. We shall now examine this claim.(FACTS OF FAITH by Christian Edwardson Pg. 10-13)

Click to expand...

On all sides the Roman priests were under arms. The city of Miltenberg on the Maine, which belonged to the Archbishop of Mentz, was one of the German towns that had received the Word of God with the greatest eagerness. The inhabitants were much attached to their pastor John Draco, one of the most enlightened men of his times. He was compelled to leave the city; but the Roman ecclesiastics were frightened, and withdrew at the same time, fearing the vengeance of the people. One evangelical deacon alone remained to comfort their hearts. At the same time troops from Mentz marched into the city: they spread through the streets, uttering blasphemies, brandishing their swords, and giving themselves up to debauchery.

Some evangelical Christians fell beneath their blows; others were seized and thrown into dungeons; the Romish rites were restored; the reading of the Bible was prohibited; and the inhabitants were forbidden to speak of the Gospel, even in the most private meetings. On the entrance of the troops, the deacon had taken refuge in the house of a poor widow. He was denounced to their commanders, who sent a soldier to apprehend him. The humble deacon, hearing the hasty steps of the soldier who sought his life, quietly waited for him, and just as the door of the chamber was opened abruptly, he went forward meekly, and cordially embracing him, said: “I welcome thee, brother; here I am; plunge thy sword into my bosom.” The fierce soldier, in astonishment, let his sword fall from his hands, and protected the pious evangelist from any further harm. Meantime, the inquisitors of the Low Countries, thirsting for blood, scoured the country, searching everywhere for the young Augustines who had escaped from the Antwerp persecution. Esch, Voes, and Lambert were at last discovered, put in chains, and led to Brussels. Egmondanus, Hochstraten, and several other inquisitors, summoned them into their presence. “Do you retract your assertion,” asked Hochstraten, “that the priest has not the power to forgive sins, and that it belongs to God alone?” He then proceeded to enumerate other evangelical doctrines which they were called upon to abjure. “No! we will retract nothing,” exclaimed Esch and Voes firmly; “we will not deny the Word of God; we will rather die for the faith.” (HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY by J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, BOOK 10, CHAPTER 4, Pg 892)

Click to expand...

HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION IN THE TIME OF CALVIN VOL. 4
by J.H. Merle d’Aubigne BOOK 7 CHAPTER 3
FAREL, MAISONNEUVE, AND FURBITY IN GENEVA. Pg. 205

The new year was to make the balance incline to the side of the Reformation; accordingly the clergy, as if terrified at the future, resolved to destroy the tree by the roots, and inaugurated the first day of the year 1534 by an extraordinary proclamation. ‘In the name of Monseigneur of Geneva and of his vicar,’ said the priests from all the pulpits, ‘it is ordered that no one shall preach the Word of God, either in public or in private, and that all the books of Holy Scripture, whether in French or in German, shall be burnt.’ The reformed, who were present in great numbers in the church, were staggered at the new-year’s gift which the bishop presented to his people. The Dominican, who was preaching that day for the last time, outdid the proclamation, and bade farewell of his audience in a paltry epigram: —

Je veux vous donner mes etrennes,
Dieu convertisse les lutherens!
S’ils ne se retournent a bien,
Qu’il leur donne fievres quartaines!
Qui vent si, prennent ses mitaines!

Notwithstanding his invocation of the quartan ague, the catholics said, with tears in their eyes, ‘With what devotion he takes leave of us!’ All, however, had not been equally touched: just as the monk was preparing to depart, his guards stopped him, for he had forgotten that he was a prisoner.

Meanwhile the episcopal mandate was causing disturbance in the city. ‘Forbid the preaching of the Gospel,’ said some; ‘burn the holy books! What a horrible notion! The Mahometans never did anything like it with regard to the Koran, or the Ghebers with the books of Zoroaster. Those who are charged to preach the Word of God are the very men to condemn it to the flames! ‘Thus catholics and evangelicals took up arms — the former to destroy the Bible, the others to defend it.

Click to expand...

HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION IN THE TIME OF CALVIN VOL. 6

by J.H. Merle d’Aubigne, BOOK 10, CHAPTER 7

CONFESSORS OF THE GOSPEL AND MARTYRS ARE MULTIPLIED IN SCOTLAND. Pgs. 88&89

He did not remain idle. He had a last duty to discharge to his master the king. ‘The bishops of your kingdom,’ he wrote to him, ‘oppose our teaching the Gospel of Christ. I offer to present myself before your majesty, and to convince the priests of error.’ As the king made him no answer, Seaton went to London, where he became chaplain to the duke of Suffolk, brother-in-law of Henry VIII., and preached eloquently to large audiences.

The King of England liked well enough to receive the friends of the Gospel who were banished from Scotland. One priest, more enlightened than the rest, Andrew Charteris, had called his colleagues children of the devil; and he said aloud ‘If anyone observes their cunning and their falsehood, and accuses them of impurity, they immediately accuse him of heresy. If Christ himself were in Scotland, our priestly fathers would heap on him more ignominy than the Jews themselves in old time did.’ Henry desired to see the man, talked with him at great length, and was much pleased with him. ‘Verily,’ said the king to him, ‘it is a great pity that you were ever made a priest.’

The clergy had now got rid of Hamilton, Seaton, and Alesius; but they were nevertheless disquieted because they knew that the Holy Scriptures were in Scotland. Notice was therefore given in every parish that ‘it is forbidden to sell or to read the New Testament.’ All copies found in the shops were ordered to be burnt. Alesius, who was in Germany at that time, was greatly afflicted, and resolved to speak. ‘I hear, sire,’ he wrote to the king, ‘that the bishops are driving souls away from the oracles of Christ. Could the Turks do anything worse? Would morality exist in independence of the Holy Scriptures? Would religion itself be anything else than a certain discipline of public manners? That is the doctrine of Epicurus; but what will become of the Church if the bishops propagate Epicurean dogmas? God ordains that we should hear the Son, not as a doctor who philosophises on the theory of morals, but as a prophet who reveals holy things unknown to the world. If the bishops promote the infliction of the severest penalties on those who hear his word, the knowledge of Jesus Christ will become extinct, and the people will take up pagan opinions.

Click to expand...

More later.

Valletta said:

In Europe, Latin eventually surpassed Greek as the common, or "vulgar," language of the people, thus the Latin "Vulgate." As century after century passed Latin morphed into languages like Italian and French and Spanish, hence the need by the Catholic Church for more translations.

Click to expand...

I take this to mean, that you will not share the source from which you quoted?

Amo2 said:

More quotes from various sources regarding Rome's attempts to squelch bibles written without their approval. Emphasis is mine.

More later.

Click to expand...

There are all kinds of anti-Catholic books and websites spreading false and hateful information, so that is not news. Today you just don't see it vice versa.

Amo2 said:

I take this to mean, that you will not share the source from which you quoted?

Click to expand...

I research, and so do many of my friends and fellow Christians here on these forums. I have learned so much from them, and the claim that the Catholics Church wants to keep the truth about the Bible from the laity is, sadly, one of the many false claims, repeated through the centuries. It has been refuted time and time again, and I am well versed on the subject and have posted before. When I say I research that means I often will read a source that someone has quoted from. So just minutes before your post I had gone out on the Internet and found and read at least the beginning of one of the texts you had quoted from. It was anything but a scholarly work, I say this because it started out with a negative unsupported assumption against Catholics. That is, such books typically start from a claim that here is the real motive of the Catholic Church without providing any documentation to support the assumption. And so often these books are not properly footnoted, it would be nice to know the actual place and date and name of an individual that allegedly made a statement. I hope you will take up the recommendation from @The Liturgist to examine The Cambridge History of Christianity (volumes 5 through 7), Always reading books that support our own positions is not the way to progress in knowledge.