Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Knox, Wishart ... - Catholicism, time for another C.P.Reformation

[EvangAlived]

Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Knox, Wishart., etc. ... looks like they were on to something - Catholicism (this one's for you), it looks like it is time for another C.P.R., a Common Peoples Reformation. A Catholic Priest Reformation. A Christian Practical Revival.

Do you think 'praying' all day is going to do something? No, time to get up and do something about all of the wrongs, notice:

Num 25:1 And Israel abode in S.h.i.t.t.i.m, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab.
Num 25:2 And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods.
Num 25:3 And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel.
Num 25:4 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.
Num 25:5 And Moses said unto the judges of Israel, Slay ye every one his men that were joined unto Baalpeor.
Num 25:6 And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, who were weeping before the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

You can 'pray' all day long, but you have already been given orders by God (get up, stand up and do what God commanded (I am not advocating personal killing, or taking vengenance into your own hands (the powers of state exist for a reason in God's order), I am advocating real Reformation within the limit of Holiness, Godliness, Righteousness, Justice, Truth).

Num 25:7 And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from among the congregation, and took a javelin in his hand;
Num 25:8 And he went after the man of Israel into the tent, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.
Num 25:9 And those that died in the plague were twenty and four thousand.
Num 25:10 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Num 25:11 Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, while he was zealous for my sake among them, that I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy.
Num 25:12 Wherefore say, Behold, I give unto him my covenant of peace:
Num 25:13 And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel.
Num 25:14 Now the name of the Israelite that was slain, even that was slain with the Midianitish woman, was Zimri, the son of Salu, a prince of a chief house among the Simeonites.
Num 25:15 And the name of the Midianitish woman that was slain was Cozbi, the daughter of Zur; he was head over a people, and of a chief house in Midian.

Will you, as a common Catholic person of God, do nothing? Will you, as a Catholic common person pretend that the same abuses that were happening in Martin Luther's day, in Calvin's day, in in Zwingli's day, in Knox's day, in Wishart's day, and before, in Huss's day, in Wycliffe's day, are no longer happening?

They were honourable and stood up to resist the overwhelming tide of evil, hypocrisy, lusts of the flesh (for what was found in the monasteries, nuneries, in the orders) was no different than today (and today it is getting worse).

See for yourself, there is still a great evil among you, and more yet hidden, that needs to be dealt with. Will you not stand up and start a Reformation in your diocese, in your parish, in your own city, in your own county?

Where is the primitive godliness, the holiness, the sacredness? Where is honour for God above that of men?

Peter would not stand for such abuses, mis-handling of monies, power, placement:

Act_5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Act_8:20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

Paul would not back down from pointing out backsliding:

Gal_2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

They, which have been corrupted by Satan (and make no mistake they who are doing such things have been corrupted) are to be blamed, exposed to the Light, not coddled, not hidden, not excused.

Eph_5:13 But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.

The time is now to stand for the truth as it is written, as you know it in your own heart. Do you not honour God? Do you not value the preciousness of His children? Do you not actually love (and since you do, then love must act - look at Jesus. He stood up and came down).

Talk is nothing without action.

Time for a new Reformation. And since God will be with you, who will be against you?

God's Reformers all throughout the Bible, Jeremiah, Daniel, Peter, Paul, John, etc, withstood Kings, withstood religious corruption in the Highest positions, and Jesus Himself stood face to face with the leaders of apostasy, and stared them in the face, and backed not down, knowing that God commanded them, God entrusted them with all authority in Heaven to be His ambassadors of Truth, Light and Love.

 

[Not David]

Does that mean we will have another 10 thousand denominations?

 

[sdowney717]

A reformation is simply, get out, leave any church that tolerates, promotes and abuses people sexually.
The reformers did not and could not reform the catholic church, and they were not really considering sexual abuse, so they formed their own churches.
All the massive sexual abuse of all the years through history is inherently systematic to that church structurally, or it would not be so prevalent, it is a worldwide problem of evil unregenerate priests pastoring the flock. And surprisingly large numbers of them, it is institutionalized and has been tolerated, the lavender mafia.

 

[redleghunter]

Does that mean we will have another 10 thousand denominations?

Is it only 10,000 denominations now? Thought RC apologists were using the 30,000 deal lately.

Yet...

https://www.ncregister.com/blog/sco...that-there-are-33000-protestant-denominations

 

[TuxAme]

Luther, Zwingli and the rest left because they believed that the early Church "got it wrong", not because of a clerical sex abuse crisis.

 

[EvangAlived]

Luther, Zwingli and the rest left because they believed that the early Church "got it wrong", not because of a clerical sex abuse crisis.

I will not put up with historic revisionism.

You must look again, and read some history:

Everything is easily documented. I can cite a lot more if you need, even from Papal historians and sources.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Is it only 10,000 denominations now? Thought RC apologists were using the 30,000 deal lately.

Yet...

https://www.ncregister.com/blog/sco...that-there-are-33000-protestant-denominations

I'd be curious how many fall under the non-denominational category, and how many subs of a denomination are counted as another denomination. In other words, I smell an abuse of numbers.

 

[sdowney717]

http://the-american-catholic.com/2018/07/08/the-bitter-fruits-of-the-lavender-mafia/
In Revelation, The Roman Church with the seven mountains is the harlot riding the beast.
The connection to the Roman Church has been noticed time and again for centuries of abuse.

'and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.'

4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication. 5 And on her forehead a name was written:

MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT,
THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS
AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS
OF THE EARTH.


9 “Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits.


Revelation 17 New King James Version (NKJV)
The Scarlet Woman and the Scarlet Beast
17 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying [a]to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were 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 sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication. 5 And on her forehead a name was written:

MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT,
THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS
AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS
OF THE EARTH.

6 I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And when I saw her, I marveled with great amazement.

The Meaning of the Woman and the Beast
7 But the angel said to me, “Why did you marvel? I will tell you the [c]mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and the ten horns. 8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to [d]perdition. And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was, and is not, and [e]yet is.

9 “Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. 10 There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time. 11 The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to [f]perdition.

 

[TuxAme]

I will not put up with historic revisionism.

You must look again, and read some history:

Everything is easily documented. I can cite a lot more if you need, even from Papal historians and sources.

I'm not watching three different videos. If you disagree, you can write a post.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Knox, Wishart., etc. ... looks like they were on to something - Catholicism (this one's for you), it looks like it is time for another C.P.R., a Common Peoples Reformation. A Catholic Priest Reformation. A Christian Practical Revival.

Do you think 'praying' all day is going to do something? No, time to get up and do something about all of the wrongs, notice:

Num 25:1 And Israel abode in S.h.i.t.t.i.m, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab.
Num 25:2 And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods.
Num 25:3 And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel.
Num 25:4 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.
Num 25:5 And Moses said unto the judges of Israel, Slay ye every one his men that were joined unto Baalpeor.
Num 25:6 And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, who were weeping before the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

You can 'pray' all day long, but you have already been given orders by God (get up, stand up and do what God commanded (I am not advocating personal killing, or taking vengenance into your own hands (the powers of state exist for a reason in God's order), I am advocating real Reformation within the limit of Holiness, Godliness, Righteousness, Justice, Truth).

Num 25:7 And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from among the congregation, and took a javelin in his hand;
Num 25:8 And he went after the man of Israel into the tent, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.
Num 25:9 And those that died in the plague were twenty and four thousand.
Num 25:10 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Num 25:11 Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, while he was zealous for my sake among them, that I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy.
Num 25:12 Wherefore say, Behold, I give unto him my covenant of peace:
Num 25:13 And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel.
Num 25:14 Now the name of the Israelite that was slain, even that was slain with the Midianitish woman, was Zimri, the son of Salu, a prince of a chief house among the Simeonites.
Num 25:15 And the name of the Midianitish woman that was slain was Cozbi, the daughter of Zur; he was head over a people, and of a chief house in Midian.

Will you, as a common Catholic person of God, do nothing? Will you, as a Catholic common person pretend that the same abuses that were happening in Martin Luther's day, in Calvin's day, in in Zwingli's day, in Knox's day, in Wishart's day, and before, in Huss's day, in Wycliffe's day, are no longer happening?

They were honourable and stood up to resist the overwhelming tide of evil, hypocrisy, lusts of the flesh (for what was found in the monasteries, nuneries, in the orders) was no different than today (and today it is getting worse).

See for yourself, there is still a great evil among you, and more yet hidden, that needs to be dealt with. Will you not stand up and start a Reformation in your diocese, in your parish, in your own city, in your own county?

Where is the primitive godliness, the holiness, the sacredness? Where is honour for God above that of men?

Peter would not stand for such abuses, mis-handling of monies, power, placement:

Act_5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Act_8:20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

Paul would not back down from pointing out backsliding:

Gal_2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

They, which have been corrupted by Satan (and make no mistake they who are doing such things have been corrupted) are to be blamed, exposed to the Light, not coddled, not hidden, not excused.

Eph_5:13 But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.

The time is now to stand for the truth as it is written, as you know it in your own heart. Do you not honour God? Do you not value the preciousness of His children? Do you not actually love (and since you do, then love must act - look at Jesus. He stood up and came down).

Talk is nothing without action.

Time for a new Reformation. And since God will be with you, who will be against you?

God's Reformers all throughout the Bible, Jeremiah, Daniel, Peter, Paul, John, etc, withstood Kings, withstood religious corruption in the Highest positions, and Jesus Himself stood face to face with the leaders of apostasy, and stared them in the face, and backed not down, knowing that God commanded them, God entrusted them with all authority in Heaven to be His ambassadors of Truth, Light and Love.

What you're describing is not a "reformation".

 

[Not David]

OP., what things should the Catholic Church reform?

 

[TuxAme]

OP., what things should the Catholic Church reform?

Good question. I see in the OP a call to action, but we aren't told what that action should be. "Do something!" is extremely vague.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I will not put up with historic revisionism.

You must look again, and read some history:

Everything is easily documented. I can cite a lot more if you need, even from Papal historians and sources.

Golly, there have been some bad popes over the Church's 2,000 year history. Whoda thunk?

 

[EvangAlived]

Here are the qualifications for True Leadership, is this in your leadership in your church:

1Ti 3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
1Ti 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
1Ti 3:4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
1Ti 3:5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
1Ti 3:6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
1Ti 3:7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
1Ti 3:8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
1Ti 3:9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
1Ti 3:10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.
1Ti 3:11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
1Ti 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
1Ti 3:13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

If not, they do not belong in positions of leadership. Remove them.

 

[EvangAlived]

Golly, there have been some bad popes over the Church's 2,000 year history. Whoda thunk?

Do you excuse their atrocities? Yes or No please.

The Papacy From 896 to 1048 AD

Even the Vatican’s apologists acknowledge that the Papacy passed through a dark age from 896 to 1048; they describe the Papacy of the 900s as a “inappropriate contentocracy,” due to its domination by the Theophylacts, a corrupt family of Roman nobles. The Papal misdeeds of this era include: [1]

Boniface VI (896): Died after about 15 days in office – the second shortest Papal term of office in history. He was elected despite having been defrocked twice (once from the sub-diaconate, and once from the priesthood, and without being canonically reinstated to orders) by Pope John VIII for immorality. [3]

Stephen VI (896-897): Exhumed the corpse of Pope Formosus (891-896), tried the body for offenses against canon law in the “Cadaver Synod,” and had the former Pope's body mutilated (the three fingers used for blessing were chopped off) and the remains tossed into the Tiber. This outraged the population to the point of insurrection. Stephen was deposed and strangled – and then buried in St. Peter's.

Sergius III (904-911): Jailed and strangled his predecessor Leo V (903), as well as the antipope Christopher who had overthrown Leo. Sergius reaffirmed the “Cadaver Synod” verdict against Pope Formosus, and bore an illegitimate son with the Theophylact noblewoman Marozia; the boy later became Pope John XI.

John X (914-928): In order to gain the release of the French King (Charles the Simple) from his imprisonment by Count Heribert of Aquitaine, John confirmed the election of the Count's five-year-old son as Archbishop of Rheims.

John XII (955-964): Elected at age 18, deposed for “perfidy and treason” in 963, overthrew his successor after a few months, and “died at age twenty-eight – of a stroke suffered while in the bed of a married woman.” [4] A traditionalist historian says, “The Lateran Palace was called a brothel in his day, thanks to his diverse taste in lovers – both in terms of gender and number.”[5] John “did not hesitate to consecrate as bishop a ten-year-old boy as token of his affection, or to give sacred vessels to prostitutes.”[6]

John XIX (1024-1032): Won election through bribery.

Benedict IX (1032-1045): According to a traditionalist historian, “his personal life was so disgusting (filled as it was with mistresses and rumors of incest and sodomy) that one of the city's factions was able to rally support against him and drive Benedict out of Rome.”[7] After he fought his way back to power, he soon “accepted a bribe to abdicate in favor of his godfather, the arch priest John Gratian. [8]

Gregory VI (1045-1046): John Gratian was deposed for having bought election to the Papacy.

 

[EvangAlived]

Golly, there have been some bad popes over the Church's 2,000 year history. Whoda thunk?

Do you excuse their atricities? Yes or no please.

The Papacy From 1455 to 1555 AD

· The Papacy of 1455-1555 likewise earned infamy for its immorality.[9] As is obvious, various Papal decisions (those that apologists describe as “disciplinary acts”) led directly to Protestant revolts in Germany and England. During this period, ancient paganism became respectable in the Vatican; Curial writing referred to “God the Father as ‘Jupiter Optimus Maximus,’ to the Virgin Mary as ‘Diana,’ to the Apostles as ‘legates,’ and to the bishops as ‘proconsuls.’”[10]

Callistus III (1455-1458): Made two nephews cardinals, and made a third nephew the commander of the Papal army. One of these nephews, Rodrigo Borgia, was made cardinal-deacon at age 25, and became vice-chancellor of the Holy See at age 26. This posting – and the immense wealth that the young cardinal was able to gain from it – paved the way for Rodrigo’s election as Pope Alexander VI in 1492.

Pius II (1458-1464): “known throughout Italy and beyond as a connoisseur, an historian, and the author of erotic plays and tales.”[11] PiusII made two nephews cardinals; one of these – who got his red hat at age 21 – reigned for a month as Pius III (1503).

Paul II (1464-1471): According to a liberal historian, he was “among the worst of the Renaissance popes: a vain, intellectually shallow, ostentatious playboy.” [12]

Sixtus IV (1471-1484): Named six nephews to the College of Cardinals; one of these would later become Pope Julius II. Sixtus’ coronation tiara cost 100,000 ducats – and this was just the beginning of his extravagances. He “connived at the Pazzi conspiracy to murder Lorenzo and Giuliano de’ Medici at High Mass at the Duomo in Florence.”[13] Giuliano died, but Lorenzo survived, and Florence rose against the Pope's allies. In response, “the pope placed Florence under interdict, and a two years’ war with the city began.”[14]

Innocent VIII (1484-1492): Won election by bribery, and created a plethora of unnecessary new posts in the Curia, auctioning them to the highest bidder to raise money. In 1489, he struck a deal with the Turkish Sultan. The Pope detained the Sultan Bayezit's fugitive (and rival) brother in Rome, and the Sultan gave the Pope an initial payment “almost equal to the total annual revenue of the papal state,”[15] plus an annual fee of 45,000 gold ducats, plus the relic of the Holy Lance, which supposedly pierced the side of Christ on the Cross. Innocent VIII made Giovanni Medici a cardinal at age 13; the young man was later elected as Pope Leo X.

Alexander VI (1492-1503): The father of “at least nine illegitimate children,”[16] he won his election by “generous bribes and promises of lucrative appointments and benefices,” and soon made clear that “the consuming passions of his pontificate would be gold, women, and the interests of his family. He named his son Cesare, at age eighteen, a cardinal, along with the brother of the current papal mistress. He also arranged several marriages for his daughter Lucrezia and often left her in charge of the papacy, as virtual regent, when he was away from Rome.” [17] The aforementioned papal mistress was Giulia Farnese, wife of Orsino Orsini; Romans referred to her sarcastically as “the bride of Christ.”[18]

Julius II (1503-1513): The nephew of Sixtus IV, and made cardinal by him at age 18. While a cardinal, he sired three daughters. With the aid of “substantial bribes and promises of ecclesiastical preferments,” he won unanimous election to the Papacy in a one-day conclave.[19] Julius donned silver armor and led his armies across Italy to expand the Papal States. He gave Henry VIII, the King of England, a dispensation to marry his brother's widow, Catherine of Aragon. (The dispensation soon backfired. When Henry sought an annulment from his marriage to Catherine, Pope Clement VII refused. This led to the Anglican schism of 1534.) Julius laid the cornerstone of the new Basilica of St. Peter in 1506 – but made the fateful decision to cover the construction costs by selling indulgences. In the bull Cumtam divino, he also declared Papal elections invalid if gained through simony – an ironic ruling, given the circumstances of his own election.

Ironically ,the sainted Pope Pius X reversed this decree. In the 1904 decree Vacante Sede Apostolica, Pius condemned simony, but held that this would not invalidate a Papal election. His successors did the same. John Paul II ruled in 1996 that “If – God forbid – in the election of the Roman Pontiff the crime of simony were to be perpetrated, I decree and declare that all those guilty thereof shall incur excommunication latae sententiae. At the same time I remove the nullity or invalidity of the same simoniacal provision, in order that – as was already established by my Predecessors – the validity of the election of the Roman Pontiff may not for this reason be challenged.”[20]

LeoX (1513-1521): Upon his election, he said, “God has given us the papacy; now let us enjoy it.”[21] He continued the sale of indulgences to finance construction of St. Peter's. It was the marketing of this “spiritual benefit” by the Dominican preacher John Tetzel that caused Luther to post the “95 Theses” on the cathedral door at Wittenberg in 1517, starting the Reformation. King Henry VIII publicly opposed Luther and wrote In Defense of the Seven Sacraments; as a reward for this book, Leo gave the English King the title of “Defender of the Faith” – a title that the English royalty have continued using ever since, despite their schism from Rome. One of Leo's cardinals was his nephew, Giulio de’ Medici, who was later elected as Clement VII (1523-1534).

Paul III (1534-1549): While serving as a cardinal, he had kept a mistress, by whom he had four children. Upon his election, the first two cardinals he chose were his teenage grandsons. Paul “was an ardent believer in astrology, timing consistories, audiences, even the issue of bulls, according to the most auspicious arrangement of the stars.” [22]

Julius III (1550-1555): “created a scandal because of his infatuation with a fifteen-year-old boy whom he picked up in the streets of Parma,had his brother adopt, and then made a cardinal and head of the Secretariat of State.”[23] Another biographer describes this youth, Fabiano (who took the name of Innocenzo del Monte), as a “depraved … custodian of monkeys,”[24] and a Roman satirist of the time described Fabiano as an “empty and feminine boy.”[25] Fabiano fell from grace after Julius III died. Pius IV jailed Fabiano for killing two people at a banquet, and exiled him after his release from prison; then, Pius V removed Fabiano’s red hat.

 

[EvangAlived]

Golly, there have been some bad popes over the Church's 2,000 year history. Whoda thunk?

Do you excuse their heresies? Yes or no please?

Defenders of the Hierarchy say that (a) even the worst of Popes never formally taught heresy, and (b) that the evil behavior of some Popes does not impair their authority and accuracy as teachers of the Faith. This defense fails on both counts:

1. Several Popes have indeed fallen into heresy,[28] at least for a time, and one Pope was anathematized by an Ecumenical Council.

Liberius (352-366): Initially opposed the Arian heresy (which denied the divinity of Christ), and was exiled in 355 by the Arian emperor Constantius II. Under duress, Liberius approved a semi-Arian creed that had been produced by a church synod, and excommunicated the orthodox bishop Athanasius. The Emperor allowed the Pope to return to Rome in 358. Only after the Emperor died in 361 did Liberius return to orthodoxy, reinstating Athanasius and urging all bishops to adhere to the faith that had been stated at the Council of Nicaea.

Zosimus (417-418): Initially revoked the prior Pope's condemnation of Pelagius (who promoted the heresy that men can be saved by their own efforts, without the need for divine grace). After protests from bishops in North Africa, including St. Augustine), the Pope reversed himself and restated Rome’s opposition to the heresy.

Vigilius (537-555): Vacillated between support for orthodox theology (as taught by Chalcedon– that Christ is fully God and fully man, thus having two natures) and the Monophysite heresy, which teaches that Christ has only one nature. (As with Liberius, coercion by the Emperor explained some of Vigilius’ conduct.)

Vigilius ’greatest crime had been the way he obtained the Papacy: he had aligned himself with the dissolute Empress Theodora, posed as a Monophysite sympathizer to gain her support, and went to Rome with her money to buy election as Pope. The clergy there had already elected Silverius as Pope; the Imperial authorities responded by sending Silverius into exile and declaring the Holy See to be vacant. Vigilius won then Papal election, arrested Silverius as soon as the former Pope returned to Rome, and exiled him again – leading to Silverius’ early death by starvation. As a historian of the Papacy reports, “To all intents and purposes, one Pope, and he the son of a pope, had been deposed and murdered by another.”[29] These acts raise a question: shouldn't posing as a heretic, and doing so with such lethal effect, “count” against a Pope in the same way that intentionally issuing a heretical encyclical would?

Honorius I (625-638): Adhered to Monothelitism, which held that there is only one (divine) will in Christ. After Honorius died, he was solemnly condemned as a heretic by the Third Council of Constantinople, (680-681 – the Sixth Ecumenical Council).[30] Pope Leo II (682-683) affirmed the verdict, saying, “We anathematize …Honorius, who did not attempt to sanctify this ApostolicChurch with the teaching of Apostolic tradition, but by profane treachery permitted its purity to be polluted.”[31] The Seventh Ecumenical Council (787) restated this condemnation.[32] Even though Honorius did not formally define his view as Church teaching,[33] this event clearly shows that Popes can be heretical.

2. “Teaching” involves more that putting orthodox words into an encyclical with the appropriate canonical formulae. Jesus taught by his acts as well as with his sermons. Any wise parent, teacher, or manager knows that bad example can – and usually will – negate even the most inspired or well-intentioned words (or teachings) given to those under their authority. As the Apostle James said: “faith, by itself, if it has no works, is dead.” (James 2:17). Thus, when Popes lived evil lives – and yet more, when they pursued evil policies using the power, resources, and authority associated with their office – they were teachers of evil.

Lord Acton, a Catholic historian in 19th Century England, makes this case for sober and realistic judgment of the behavior of Popes (and other powerful men):

“I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.”[34]

 

[thecolorsblend]

Do you excuse their atrocities? Yes or No please.

The Papacy From 896 to 1048 AD

Even the Vatican’s apologists acknowledge that the Papacy passed through a dark age from 896 to 1048; they describe the Papacy of the 900s as a “inappropriate contentocracy,” due to its domination by the Theophylacts, a corrupt family of Roman nobles. The Papal misdeeds of this era include: [1]

Boniface VI (896): Died after about 15 days in office – the second shortest Papal term of office in history. He was elected despite having been defrocked twice (once from the sub-diaconate, and once from the priesthood, and without being canonically reinstated to orders) by Pope John VIII for immorality. [3]

Stephen VI (896-897): Exhumed the corpse of Pope Formosus (891-896), tried the body for offenses against canon law in the “Cadaver Synod,” and had the former Pope's body mutilated (the three fingers used for blessing were chopped off) and the remains tossed into the Tiber. This outraged the population to the point of insurrection. Stephen was deposed and strangled – and then buried in St. Peter's.

Sergius III (904-911): Jailed and strangled his predecessor Leo V (903), as well as the antipope Christopher who had overthrown Leo. Sergius reaffirmed the “Cadaver Synod” verdict against Pope Formosus, and bore an illegitimate son with the Theophylact noblewoman Marozia; the boy later became Pope John XI.

John X (914-928): In order to gain the release of the French King (Charles the Simple) from his imprisonment by Count Heribert of Aquitaine, John confirmed the election of the Count's five-year-old son as Archbishop of Rheims.

John XII (955-964): Elected at age 18, deposed for “perfidy and treason” in 963, overthrew his successor after a few months, and “died at age twenty-eight – of a stroke suffered while in the bed of a married woman.” [4] A traditionalist historian says, “The Lateran Palace was called a brothel in his day, thanks to his diverse taste in lovers – both in terms of gender and number.”[5] John “did not hesitate to consecrate as bishop a ten-year-old boy as token of his affection, or to give sacred vessels to prostitutes.”[6]

John XIX (1024-1032): Won election through bribery.

Benedict IX (1032-1045): According to a traditionalist historian, “his personal life was so disgusting (filled as it was with mistresses and rumors of incest and sodomy) that one of the city's factions was able to rally support against him and drive Benedict out of Rome.”[7] After he fought his way back to power, he soon “accepted a bribe to abdicate in favor of his godfather, the arch priest John Gratian. [8]

Gregory VI (1045-1046): John Gratian was deposed for having bought election to the Papacy.

Jack Chick called; he wants his pamphlets back.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Do you excuse their heresies? Yes or no please?

Defenders of the Hierarchy say that (a) even the worst of Popes never formally taught heresy, and (b) that the evil behavior of some Popes does not impair their authority and accuracy as teachers of the Faith. This defense fails on both counts:

1. Several Popes have indeed fallen into heresy,[28] at least for a time, and one Pope was anathematized by an Ecumenical Council.

Liberius (352-366): Initially opposed the Arian heresy (which denied the divinity of Christ), and was exiled in 355 by the Arian emperor Constantius II. Under duress, Liberius approved a semi-Arian creed that had been produced by a church synod, and excommunicated the orthodox bishop Athanasius. The Emperor allowed the Pope to return to Rome in 358. Only after the Emperor died in 361 did Liberius return to orthodoxy, reinstating Athanasius and urging all bishops to adhere to the faith that had been stated at the Council of Nicaea.

Zosimus (417-418): Initially revoked the prior Pope's condemnation of Pelagius (who promoted the heresy that men can be saved by their own efforts, without the need for divine grace). After protests from bishops in North Africa, including St. Augustine), the Pope reversed himself and restated Rome’s opposition to the heresy.

Vigilius (537-555): Vacillated between support for orthodox theology (as taught by Chalcedon– that Christ is fully God and fully man, thus having two natures) and the Monophysite heresy, which teaches that Christ has only one nature. (As with Liberius, coercion by the Emperor explained some of Vigilius’ conduct.)

Vigilius ’greatest crime had been the way he obtained the Papacy: he had aligned himself with the dissolute Empress Theodora, posed as a Monophysite sympathizer to gain her support, and went to Rome with her money to buy election as Pope. The clergy there had already elected Silverius as Pope; the Imperial authorities responded by sending Silverius into exile and declaring the Holy See to be vacant. Vigilius won then Papal election, arrested Silverius as soon as the former Pope returned to Rome, and exiled him again – leading to Silverius’ early death by starvation. As a historian of the Papacy reports, “To all intents and purposes, one Pope, and he the son of a pope, had been deposed and murdered by another.”[29] These acts raise a question: shouldn't posing as a heretic, and doing so with such lethal effect, “count” against a Pope in the same way that intentionally issuing a heretical encyclical would?

Honorius I (625-638): Adhered to Monothelitism, which held that there is only one (divine) will in Christ. After Honorius died, he was solemnly condemned as a heretic by the Third Council of Constantinople, (680-681 – the Sixth Ecumenical Council).[30] Pope Leo II (682-683) affirmed the verdict, saying, “We anathematize …Honorius, who did not attempt to sanctify this ApostolicChurch with the teaching of Apostolic tradition, but by profane treachery permitted its purity to be polluted.”[31] The Seventh Ecumenical Council (787) restated this condemnation.[32] Even though Honorius did not formally define his view as Church teaching,[33] this event clearly shows that Popes can be heretical.

2. “Teaching” involves more that putting orthodox words into an encyclical with the appropriate canonical formulae. Jesus taught by his acts as well as with his sermons. Any wise parent, teacher, or manager knows that bad example can – and usually will – negate even the most inspired or well-intentioned words (or teachings) given to those under their authority. As the Apostle James said: “faith, by itself, if it has no works, is dead.” (James 2:17). Thus, when Popes lived evil lives – and yet more, when they pursued evil policies using the power, resources, and authority associated with their office – they were teachers of evil.

Lord Acton, a Catholic historian in 19th Century England, makes this case for sober and realistic judgment of the behavior of Popes (and other powerful men):

“I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.”[34]

I read that the first time, bro.

 

[EvangAlived]

Of Godly men, leaders in the way of Jesus Christ:

1Ti 6:11 But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
1Ti 6:12 Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.
1Ti 6:13 I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;
1Ti 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
1Ti 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
1Ti 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.