Books Outside the Bible

[BobRyan]

Hi Bob.

Do you know the history behind why The Church was "banning possession of the bible"? @CoreIssue hasn't been able to figure it out yet.

hmm let's see how they could have gotten spun around to do such a horrific thing

Do you know the history of "bible possession banned by the Catholic Church"?
Mary

It already sounds bad...
============================================= from
Bible possession once banned by the Catholic Church!

ITEM #1 POPE INNOCENT III

Pope Innocent III stated in 1199:

... "to be reproved are those who translate into French the Gospels, the letters of Paul, the psalter, etc. They are moved by a certain love of Scripture in order to explain them clandestinely and to preach them to one another. The mysteries of the faith are not to explained rashly to anyone. Usually in fact, they cannot be understood by everyone but only by those who are qualified to understand them with informed intelligence. The depth of the divine Scriptures is such that not only the illiterate and uninitiated have difficulty understanding them, but also the educated and the gifted" (Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum 770-771)

Source: Bridging the Gap - Lectio Divina, Religious Education, and the Have-not's by Father John Belmonte, S.J.

ITEM #2 COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D.

The Council of Toulouse, which met in November of 1229, about the time of the crusade against the Albigensians, set up a special ecclesiastical tribunal, or court, known as the Inquisition (Lat. inquisitio, an inquiry), to search out and try heretics. Twenty of the forty-five articles decreed by the Council dealt with heretics and heresy. It ruled in part:

"Canon 1. We appoint, therefore, that the archbishops and bishops shall swear in one priest, and two or three laymen of good report, or more if they think fit, in every parish, both in and out of cities, who shall diligently, faithfully, and frequently seek out the heretics in those parishes, by searching all houses and subterranean chambers which lie under suspicion. And looking out for appendages or outbuildings, in the roofs themselves, or any other kind of hiding places, all which we direct to be destroyed."

Canon 6. Directs that the house in which any heretic shall be found shall be destroyed.

"Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books."

Source: Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Edited with an introduction by Edward Peters, Scolar Press, London, copyright 1980 by Edward Peters, ISBN 0-85967-621-8, pp. 194-195, citing S. R. Maitland, Facts and Documents [illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses], London, Rivington, 1832, pp. 192-194.
==========================

Yep pretty horrific. No wonder Pope Francis apologized to the Waldenses last year.

I ask easy questions that are tough to answer.

You keep asking questions about why the RCC did horrific things in the dark ages - "as if" we are supposed to find some excuse for them doing it. And you do this as if it somehow helps your point.

Very curious.

Hi bob,
I thought we were talking about the 12th and 13th centuries? You know that the dark ages were from roughly the 5th to 11th century?
Dark Ages - New World Encyclopedia
Migration period | European history

The dark ages start around 538A.D. and end in the 1700's - you may recognize that span of time.

It appears you don't know your own Christian history. I refer you to @BreadOfLife post #825 as a starting point.

There is no excuse for what any Christian church leader did no matter if they were Protestant or Catholic.

Protestants take that position all the time - but you can seldom ever find a Catholic arguing that the RCC was comitting crimes against humanity in the dark ages with their extermination policies, their burning Bibles, burning humans at the stake, inquisition, etc.

The most logical response is to just chalk it all up to sin, evil, crime, ignorance and move on -- which is what Protestants do whenever some bad detail about Protestant history surfaces. Catholics on the other hand tend to "cling" to those bad ideas as 'infallible' since they are on record as being endorsed by supposedly infallible ecumenical councils and commands placed into canon law. They have to toss the doctrine on infallability out the window if they want to come clean on this topic.

You don't seem "very curious" to me since you only want to point out what the CC did and not acknowledge what the Protestant churches did which were the SAME THING!!

Historical Mary

1. I did point out that there are some instances where a Protestant nations does something wrong.
2. but that fades to pale by comparison to the RCC's 1260 years of the dark ages

What I do NOT have to do - is circle wagons around any Protestant errors of the past as if some protestant doctrine would fail if any of their bad actors in history were to be condemned.

 

[BobRyan]

Below, I will mention why each of the 20 Canons are incompatible with all Protestantism in one way or another. This leaves Protestantism in a significant bind, because virtually all Protestants wholeheartedly affirm the Creed and deem the Council to be an orthodox testimony in early Christianity.

This should be good.

After reading these Canons, the Protestant must recognize that they cannot embrace the Creed without also embracing the Canons, because if the Canons teach heresy and error, then the Protestant has no business at all embracing the Creed which this same Council produced. Protestants have no problem affirming the Catholic Church is correct on a lot of things, but they say the Catholic Church is false and cannot be trusted because it also teaches many errors. By this same logic, a Protestant must reject Nicaea as well, for Nicaea teaches many "errors" in its Canons and binds all Christians to these "errors" as well.

NICK'S CATHOLIC BLOG: Why Protestants reject the Council of Nicaea.

The Council of Nicae of 325 A.D. affirmed the Doctrine of the Trinity with Tradition and Scripture, it was proven what was always believed; they didn't "invent" the Trinity.
"The Trinity can be proven from Scripture, indeed (material sufficiency), but Scripture Alone as a principle was not formally sufficient to prevent the Arian crisis from occurring. In other words, the decisive factor in these controversies was the appeal to apostolic succession and Tradition, which showed that the Church had always been trinitarian." The heretic Arius lost because the tradition of Arianism did not exist.

NICK'S CATHOLIC BLOG: Sola Scriptura: Formal versus Material Sufficiency

Which is a failed argument. It would be like saying that Judas' differences with Christ proves "Christ is not enough". It is a hollow argument.

Lucifer's example proves that "existence of division is not proof of a flaw in the starting conditions". You are blaming the good -- for the existence of the bad.

Give us a "compelling" argument.

 

[brakelite]

Thank you for ready my post sir.

Would you please reveal WHICH post of mine you are referring to? I look forward to your evidence.

Curious Mary

No, I'm not going to bother. Of you said that, but didn't mean it, and went back and edited your post, fine. If you said it, and meant it, why do I need to prove it?

 

[brakelite]

Soooooo anything written by Rome is a lie but anything written by Brakelite or anyone that disagrees with Rome is the truth?

Makes sense to me.....

Sounds like the rebuttal of a 13 year old. I wasn't asking you, or anyone else to believe me, but on the contrary, study history. There are many reliable credible historians who have written and word other, older, and even more reliable sources that confirm that there was a thriving Christian church outside of Roman jurisdiction and who had the scriptures before Jerome came on the scene... Before Constantine ordered his 50 Bibles. Don't take my word for it. In BoLs language, do some homework.
But grow up first.

 

[brakelite]

You’ll have to do better than that.

Ignatius of Antioch, who was a student of the Apostle John wrote the following to the people of Smrynea on his was to his martyrdom in Rome – while the Apostle John was STILL ALIVE:

Ignatius of Antioch
See that ye all follow the BISHOP, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the BISHOP. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the BISHOP shall appear, there let the multitude of the people also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8 [A.D. 107]).

Do your HOMEWORK . . .

Surprised you quoted that. The apostasy started even earlier then. Which confirms scripture when John said, even now there are many Antichrists.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

This should be good.




Which is a failed argument. It would be like saying that Judas' differences with Christ proves "Christ is not enough". It is a hollow argument.

Lucifer's example proves that "existence of division is not proof of a flaw in the starting conditions". You are blaming the good -- for the existence of the bad.

Give us a "compelling" argument.

I thought you'd be interested in this, Bob.

F. Tupper Saussy, Rulers of Evil (HarperCollins, 2001): xviii, 304:

The Roman Inquisition…had been administered since 1542 by the Jesuits.​

Pontifex Maximus [i.e., the pope of Rome] has laundered the Inquisition’s name twice. In 1908, Pope Pius X renamed it ‘the Holy Office’, which [Pope] Paul VI transformed into [the] ‘Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’ in 1965.​

 

[Marymog]

No, I'm not going to bother. Of you said that, but didn't mean it, and went back and edited your post, fine. If you said it, and meant it, why do I need to prove it?

Got it.....ONCE AGAIN....you say something but can't back it up.

Moving on...Mary

 

[Marymog]

Sounds like the rebuttal of a 13 year old. I wasn't asking you, or anyone else to believe me, but on the contrary, study history. There are many reliable credible historians who have written and word other, older, and even more reliable sources that confirm that there was a thriving Christian church outside of Roman jurisdiction and who had the scriptures before Jerome came on the scene... Before Constantine ordered his 50 Bibles. Don't take my word for it. In BoLs language, do some homework.
But grow up first.

You have done like a lot of low educated people do when they are loosing the argument. They resort to personal attacks, name calling and general statements that are not backed up and can not be backed up by facts.

It is clear thru your post on this website and your own website that anything written by Rome is a lie and anything written by Brakelite (or anyone that disagrees with Rome) is the truth. Deny it all you want....your own words convict you.

Moving on....Mary

 

[epostle]

What I do NOT have to do - is circle wagons around any Protestant errors of the past as if some protestant doctrine would fail if any of their bad actors in history were to be condemned.[/QUOTE]

hmm let's see how they could have gotten spun around to do such a horrific thing


It already sounds bad...
============================================= from
Bible possession once banned by the Catholic Church!

ITEM #1 POPE INNOCENT III

Pope Innocent III stated in 1199:

... "to be reproved are those who translate into French the Gospels, the letters of Paul, the psalter, etc. They are moved by a certain love of Scripture in order to explain them clandestinely and to preach them to one another. The mysteries of the faith are not to explained rashly to anyone. Usually in fact, they cannot be understood by everyone but only by those who are qualified to understand them with informed intelligence. The depth of the divine Scriptures is such that not only the illiterate and uninitiated have difficulty understanding them, but also the educated and the gifted" (Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum 770-771)

Source: Bridging the Gap - Lectio Divina, Religious Education, and the Have-not's by Father John Belmonte, S.J.

ITEM #2 COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D.

The Council of Toulouse, which met in November of 1229, about the time of the crusade against the Albigensians, set up a special ecclesiastical tribunal, or court, known as the Inquisition (Lat. inquisitio, an inquiry), to search out and try heretics. Twenty of the forty-five articles decreed by the Council dealt with heretics and heresy. It ruled in part:

"Canon 1. We appoint, therefore, that the archbishops and bishops shall swear in one priest, and two or three laymen of good report, or more if they think fit, in every parish, both in and out of cities, who shall diligently, faithfully, and frequently seek out the heretics in those parishes, by searching all houses and subterranean chambers which lie under suspicion. And looking out for appendages or outbuildings, in the roofs themselves, or any other kind of hiding places, all which we direct to be destroyed."

Canon 6. Directs that the house in which any heretic shall be found shall be destroyed.

"Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books."

Source: Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Edited with an introduction by Edward Peters, Scolar Press, London, copyright 1980 by Edward Peters, ISBN 0-85967-621-8, pp. 194-195, citing S. R. Maitland, Facts and Documents [illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses], London, Rivington, 1832, pp. 192-194.
==========================

More lies from the hate cults.

OK, here is what Pope Innocent III really said, with proper citation to the actual document.

Cum ex injuncto (1199) [in part]

Truly our venerable brother the Bishop of Metz has signified to us in his letter that both in the diocese and in the city of Metz the multitude of laymen and women, drawn in no small way by desire, have had the Scriptures, Gospels, the Pauline epistles, the Psalter, the commentaries on Job and many other books translated for their own use into the French language, exerting themselves towards this kind of translation so willingly, but not so prudently, that in secret meetings the laymen and women dare to discuss such matters between themselves, and to preach to each other: they also reject their community, do not intermingle with similar people, and consider themselves separate from them, and do not align their ears and minds with them; when any of the parish priests wished to censure them concerning these matters, they stood firm before them, trying to argue from the Scriptures that they should not be prohibited in any way from doing these things. Some of them also scorned the simplicity of their priests; and when the Word of Salvation is shown to them by those priests, they grumble in secret that they understand the Word better in their little books and that they can explain it more prudently.

But although the desire to understand the divine Scriptures, and, according to the Scriptures themselves, the zeal to spread them, is not forbidden, but is rather commendable, nevertheless the arguments against it appear well-deserved, because those who do not adhere to such arguments celebrate their assemblies in secret, usurp for themselves the duty of preaching, mock the simplicity of the priests and reject their community. For God, the true light, which illuminates all men coming into this world, hates such works of darkness so much that when he was about to send his apostles out into the world to preach the Gospel to all creation, he ordered them clearly, saying: “That which I tell you in the dark, speak ye in the light: and that which you hear in the ear, preach ye upon the housetops”; announcing openly in this way that the preaching of the Gospel must not be carried out in hidden communities, as heretics do, but in churches in the Catholic manner. For according to the testimony of Truth, “every one that doth evil hateth the light and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved. But he that doth truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest: because they are done in God.”

Because of this, when the high priest “asked Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine, Jesus answered him: I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in the synagogue and in the temple, whither all the Jews resort: and in secret I have spoken nothing.” Furthermore, if anyone objects that according to the Lord’s command “give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine”, since Christ himself also said “unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables”, he should understand that dogs and pigs are not things which happily bring holiness and willingly accept pearls, but things which tear apart holiness and scorn pearls, just like those who do not venerate the words of the Gospel and the ecclesiastical sacraments as Catholics, but rather detest them as heretics, who are always chattering and blaspheming, whom the apostle Paul teaches should be avoided “after the first and second admonition.”

The mysteries of the sacraments of faith should not be explained everywhere to everyone, since they cannot be understood everywhere by everyone, but only to those who can conceive of them by their faithful intellect. Because of this the Apostle said to the simpler people: “As unto little ones in Christ I gave you milk to drink, not meat.” For “strong meat is for the perfect”, as he said to others: “we speak wisdom among the perfect;” “for I judged not myself to know anything among you, but Jesus Christ: and him crucified.” Such is the profundity of divine Scripture, that not only simple and illiterate men, but even prudent and learned men do not fully suffice to investigate its wisdom. Because of this Scripture says: “They have failed in their search.” From this it was rightly once established in divine law that the beast which touches the mountain should be stoned; that is, so that no simple and unlearned man presumes to concern himself with the sublimity of sacred Scripture, or to preach it to others.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cum_ex_injuncto_(1199)
Your "scholarly documentation" is a facade.
False Citation?

 

[epostle]

Yep pretty horrific. No wonder Pope Francis apologized to the Waldenses last year.

The Pope apologizes for bad things that happened 8 centuries ago because he is a responsible leader. That has nothing to do with the lies you posted above.
Not one Protestant has ever apologized for the numerous atrocities committed against Catholics. Again, you are pushing for a stupid rock throwing contest. You want to hold Catholics TODAY accountable for sins centuries ago, but play down the sins committed by Protestants. You want a war because you are anti-Protestant. This kind of manipulation is a form of witchcraft, IMO. Once again, GET THIS THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL; ALL CHRISTIANS TODAY ARE NOT ACCOUNTABLE FOR CENTURY OLD SINS. But you mainline hate propaganda like a junkie shoots up heroin.

You keep asking questions about why the RCC did horrific things in the dark ages - "as if" we are supposed to find some excuse for them doing it. And you do this as if it somehow helps your point.
Very curious.

Sloppy documentation with no historical context, very curious. Catholics are not afraid to admit to bad things that happened, we don't admit to lies, exaggerations, doctored up sources and gross misrepresentations. That's the religion of the anti-Catholic bigot.

The dark ages start around 538A.D. and end in the 1700's - you may recognize that span of time.
Protestants take that position all the time - but you can seldom ever find a Catholic arguing that the RCC was comitting crimes against humanity in the dark ages with their extermination policies, their burning Bibles, burning humans at the stake, inquisition, etc.

When we ask, repeatedly, for scholarly documentation from ANY Ph.D. historian of the last 50 years, you run and change the subject.
It's very curious that most anti-Catholic revisionism was written in the 18th century.

The most logical response is to just chalk it all up to sin, evil, crime, ignorance and move on -- which is what Protestants do whenever some bad detail about Protestant history surfaces. Catholics on the other hand tend to "cling" to those bad ideas as 'infallible' since they are on record as being endorsed by supposedly infallible ecumenical councils and commands placed into canon law. They have to toss the doctrine on infallability out the window if they want to come clean on this topic.

Another falsehood you can't prove. Produce an infallible document telling people to sin or knock off the hate speech.

1. I did point out that there are some instances where a Protestant nations does something wrong.
2. but that fades to pale by comparison to the RCC's 1260 years of the dark ages

Oh sure, the promotion of hospitals and the invention of the university system were crimes against humanity.

Does your groupie little fundie cult have a name? A web page? A pastor? Or are you too dysfunctional and arrogant to submit to ANY authority?
Do you do ANYTHING to help others or do you just sit around worshiping anti-Catholic lies and falsehoods?

Pope in historic visit with Waldensian leader.

Pope Francis has invited the faithful of the Waldensian and Methodist Churches to join Catholics in together proclaiming Jesus, especially to the poor and the marginalized of today.
Pope invites Waldensians and Methodists to join in serving the poor - Vatican News

In a message sent to the participants in the annual synod of the Union of Methodist and Waldensian Churches that is taking place in Torre Pellice, near Turin, northern Italy, the Pope expressed his and the Catholic Church’s fraternal closeness...


Isaiah 5 (KJV)
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

 

[epostle]

This should be good

Which is a failed argument. It would be like saying that Judas' differences with Christ proves "Christ is not enough". It is a hollow argument.

Lucifer's example proves that "existence of division is not proof of a flaw in the starting conditions". You are blaming the good -- for the existence of the bad.

Give us a "compelling" argument.

It's not a failed argument, yours is a failed rebuttal. You haven't addressed a single point in post #940 but pretend to with irrelevant comments. If you can't refute something you should just leave it alone.

 

[bbyrd009]

It is clear thru your post on this website and your own website that anything written by Rome is a lie and anything written by Brakelite (or anyone that disagrees with Rome) is the truth. Deny it all you want....your own words convict you.

boy, i hope they convict me too

 

[BreadOfLife]

Surprised you quoted that. The apostasy started even earlier then. Which confirms scripture when John said, even now there are many Antichrists.

Uh huh - and WHERE is John's rebuttal to his student's letter?
WHY was his student being martyred if he wasn't a Christian??

Nice TRY . . .

How about the Epistle of Clement, written in about the year AD 90 - while he was the POPE (Bishop of Rome)??
That is ALL about obedience to the Bishop because the people of Corinth had ousted their priests. Clement commanded them to reinstate them.

You've got your homework cut out for you . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

less falsehood.. more Bible please.
For example - heresy following Paul's "departure" from "within" ...

17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them,

“You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, how I was with you the whole time..29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears."

And your "solution" is to go to the THIRD CENTURY for "pure doctrine"??

The rest of us prefer the actual Word of God. Surely you would have noticed this by now.

Until you actually read the text -- "and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them"

Bible details matter -- as I am sure we both agree.

Ummmmm, I already responded to this - but since YOU are repeating your post - so will I . . .

No “falsehood” here. YOU need to pay attention . . .

I simply went to the 3rd century because somebody was trying to say that Cyprian of Carthage was NOT in agreement with Catholic teaching in regards to the Authority of the Bishops. It was about CYPRIAN who lived in the THIRD century. Pay attention . . .

We can go ALL the way back to Scripture for evidence of the Authority of the Bishops.
In post #932 – I pretty much destroyed your notion that I “HAD” to go to the 3rd century for evidence . . .

Also - I just got done publicly-SPANKING your partner in ignorance, @Taken in post #953, with the following . . .
How about the Epistle of Clement, written in about the year AD 90 - while he was the POPE (Bishop of Rome)??
That is ALL about obedience to the Bishop because the people of Corinth had ousted their priests. Clement commanded them to reinstate them.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

The reply button isn't working right. Epo posted this:

The mysteries of the sacraments of faith should not be explained everywhere to everyone, since they cannot be understood everywhere by everyone, but only to those who can conceive of them by their faithful intellect. Because of this the Apostle said to the simpler people: “As unto little ones in Christ I gave you milk to drink, not meat.” For “strong meat is for the perfect”, as he said to others: “we speak wisdom among the perfect;” “for I judged not myself to know anything among you, but Jesus Christ: and him crucified.” Such is the profundity of divine Scripture, that not only simple and illiterate men, but even prudent and learned men do not fully suffice to investigate its wisdom. Because of this Scripture says: “They have failed in their search.” From this it was rightly once established in divine law that the beast which touches the mountain should be stoned; that is, so that no simple and unlearned man presumes to concern himself with the sublimity of sacred Scripture, or to preach it to others.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cum_ex_injuncto_(1199)​

Wow, Epo, after reading this, now I understand WHY Roman Catholic leaders have discouraged the "simpler people" from reading and preaching the Word of God. Shame on those leaders!!!

 

[brakelite]

Uh huh - and WHERE is John's rebuttal to his student's letter?
WHY was his student being martyred if he wasn't a Christian??

Nice TRY . . .

How about the Epistle of Clement, written in about the year AD 90 - while he was the POPE (Bishop of Rome)??
That is ALL about obedience to the Bishop because the people of Corinth had ousted their priests. Clement commanded them to reinstate them.

You've got your homework cut out for you . . .

Amazingly you are totally unaware of what you are doing. Every quote you offer, every historical fact you produce, confirms my viewpoint. Far from proving me a liar, you confirm the validity of my arguments.
Those early so called church fathers you are writing are nothing but early indicators of what the papal power was quickly developing into. A tyrannical despotic power demanding obedience to the church hierarchy without any reference to or admonition to obedience to Christ. And you, @Marymog , and @epostle are continuing that very same mindset... That the church, not Christ (except when it conveniences the church) must be obeyed regardless of what the Bible teaches. Church tradition,. In accordance to the teachings of those early church fathers, takes precedence over scripture, and the church is the final arbiter of what constitutes truth. That is despotism... And you are practicing it here on this forum. The church has effectually become god. The church had become the final authority on whatever constitutes truth... Sin... Righteousness... Faith... And practice. The church therefore has become Antichrist... Replaced Christ. And everything you post here confirms that that mindset of claiming authority over the consciences of men began very early in the post apostolic era.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Amazingly you are totally unaware of what you are doing. Every quote you offer, every historical fact you produce, confirms my viewpoint. Far from proving me a liar, you confirm the validity of my arguments.
Those early so called church fathers you are writing are nothing but early indicators of what the papal power was quickly developing into. A tyrannical despotic power demanding obedience to the church hierarchy without any reference to or admonition to obedience to Christ. And you, @Marymog , and @epostle are continuing that very same mindset... That the church, not Christ (except when it conveniences the church) must be obeyed regardless of what the Bible teaches. Church tradition,. In accordance to the teachings of those early church fathers, takes precedence over scripture, and the church is the final arbiter of what constitutes truth. That is despotism... And you are practicing it here on this forum. The church has effectually become god. The church had become the final authority on whatever constitutes truth... Sin... Righteousness... Faith... And practice. The church therefore has become Antichrist... Replaced Christ. And everything you post here confirms that that mindset of claiming authority over the consciences of men began very early in the post apostolic era.

This kind of nonsense ALWAYS cracks me up.

You guys who knock the Early Church Fathers when they appear to be "Too Catholic" - are the SAME ones who quote them whenever you find a writing of theirs that you can take out of context to support your perverted doctrines.

What a JOKE . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Surprised you quoted that. The apostasy started even earlier then. Which confirms scripture when John said, even now there are many Antichrists.

Really??

WHERE are all of the Early Church Christian writings that DISAGREE with Ignatius of Antioch and all of the other men YOU deem heretical, hmmmmm?
Can you show me just ONE??

Yeah - I DIDN'T think so . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

hmm let's see how they could have gotten spun around to do such a horrific thing

It already sounds bad...
============================================= from
Bible possession once banned by the Catholic Church!

ITEM #1 POPE INNOCENT III
Pope Innocent III stated in 1199:

... "to be reproved are those who translate into French the Gospels, the letters of Paul, the psalter, etc. They are moved by a certain love of Scripture in order to explain them clandestinely and to preach them to one another. The mysteries of the faith are not to explained rashly to anyone. Usually in fact, they cannot be understood by everyone but only by those who are qualified to understand them with informed intelligence. The depth of the divine Scriptures is such that not only the illiterate and uninitiated have difficulty understanding them, but also the educated and the gifted" (Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum 770-771)

Source: Bridging the Gap - Lectio Divina, Religious Education, and the Have-not's by Father John Belmonte, S.J.
ITEM #2 COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D.

The Council of Toulouse, which met in November of 1229, about the time of the crusade against the Albigensians, set up a special ecclesiastical tribunal, or court, known as the Inquisition (Lat. inquisitio, an inquiry), to search out and try heretics. Twenty of the forty-five articles decreed by the Council dealt with heretics and heresy. It ruled in part:

"Canon 1. We appoint, therefore, that the archbishops and bishops shall swear in one priest, and two or three laymen of good report, or more if they think fit, in every parish, both in and out of cities, who shall diligently, faithfully, and frequently seek out the heretics in those parishes, by searching all houses and subterranean chambers which lie under suspicion. And looking out for appendages or outbuildings, in the roofs themselves, or any other kind of hiding places, all which we direct to be destroyed."

Canon 6. Directs that the house in which any heretic shall be found shall be destroyed.

"Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books."

Source: Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Edited with an introduction by Edward Peters, Scolar Press, London, copyright 1980 by Edward Peters, ISBN 0-85967-621-8, pp. 194-195, citing S. R. Maitland, Facts and Documents [illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses], London, Rivington, 1832, pp. 192-194.

And I already DESTROYED this argument earlier in this thread - but your repeat performance is duly noted.

I educated you about the fact that around 85-90% of the general public was FUNCTIONALLY ILLITERATE until the 19th century. I also schooled you about the fact that before the invention of the printing press in the 15th century - Bibles were HANDWRITTEN and took YEARS to complete. Because of this - they were very expensive a rare. The "general public" had neither the means nor the need for a Bible. Virtually ALL of the Bible is read aloud in mass over a short period of time.
Bibles were chained to pulpits in those days because of their value and rarity.

The prohibition on owning bibles was therefore, aimed at the rich and educated who were having spurious copies made which perverted much of the text because the same painstaking measures were NOT being taken.

DO YOUR HOMEWORK . . .

 

[brakelite]

This kind of nonsense ALWAYS cracks me up.

You guys who knock the Early Church Fathers when they appear to be "Too Catholic" - are the SAME ones who quote them whenever you find a writing of theirs that you can take out of context to support your perverted doctrines.

What a JOKE . . .

So, again you confirm my perpsective. Thanks BoL, you are doing a great job. You admit those you quoted as being Catholic, agreeing with me that demanding obedience to the church, which they do, is a Catholic characteristic. But as is usual, you cannot defend that despotic trait that lies at the heart of your church, so you go on the offensive thus displaying your own despotism...always the true Catholic.