BABYLON SCAMYLON

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... a sex crazed rogue who seduced the young women in his congregation... and frequented prostitutes

... continued ...

The Standards set forth by St. Paul for Bishops

Contrast the behavior of these Popes to the standards that St. Paul set forth for bishops:

“The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task. Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher, no drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and no lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God's church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may be puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil; moreover he must be well thought of by outsiders, or he may fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.”(1 Tim. 3:1-7)

Some Popes have been evil, indeed. Their good works notwithstanding (John XII, for example, supported the monastic reform that began at Cluny, and the Renaissance popes commissioned great works of religious art), these Popes demonstrate that no earthly religious leader “personifies Catholicism.” The deeds of these Popes show that Gregory VII (1073-1085) was in error when he asserted, in the Dictatus Papae, that “the Roman pontiff, if he have been canonically ordained, is undoubtedly made a saint by the merits of St. Peter.”[26]

Another part of the Dictatus was “the claim that the Pope alone has the right to use the imperial insignia, or that princes shall kiss his foot;” these were derived from the Donation of Constantine,[27] a fraudulent document.

The Defenders of the Hierarchy Fail in Their Efforts

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]

...

Copyright 2006 - 2014 by The M+G+R Foundation. All rights reserved. However, you may freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1) Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made for it. ..." - http://www.mgr.org/TruthAboutSomePopes.html​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

If Calvin had not been an egomaniac who had murderous intent towards anyone who disagreed with him and in fact executed many people under horrendous conditions.

Again, you do not know the history, not even concerning 'Michael' Servetus:

"... In the resolution to which the magistrates of Geneva had come, to lay the affair of Serveins before the Swiss Reformed Churches, we see the Churches of Helvetia formed into a jury. Pending the verdict, which it would seem Servetus did not for a moment doubt would be entirely in his favor, the accused took another step against Calvin. From his prison, on the 22nd of September, he sent to the Council a list of "articles on which M. Servetus wishes J. Calvin to be interrogated." He there accuses Calvin of having falsely imputed to him the [334] opinion that the soul is mortal. "If I have said that-not merely said it, but publicly written it-to infect the world, I would condemn myself to death. Wherefore, my lords, I demand that my false accuser be punished, poena talionis, and that he be detained a prisoner like me, till the cause be decided for his death or mine, or other punishment." 1 Servetus had formerly declined the civil jurisdiction in matters theological; he now, in the hope of placing the Reformer in the same hazard as himself, accepts that jurisdiction in those very matters in which he had before declined it. And further, he makes it plain that he was not more liberal than his age, in holding that a conviction for heresy ought to draw after it the punishment of death.

Meanwhile the State messenger was making his circuit of the four cities, sojourning long enough in each to permit the magistrates and pastors to consider the documents, and make up their minds. At the end of nearly a month, the messenger returned. The answers of the cities and pastors were given in to the Council on the 18th of October: they were eight in all, there being a deliverance from the Government and a deliverance from the Church in each case. The verdict eight times pronounced, with awful unanimity, was death. Thus, outside the territory of Geneva, was the fate of Servetus decided. 2 About the same time that the suffrages of the Swiss Churches were given in, an officer arrived at Geneva from the tribunal of Vienne. This man carried an order from his masters empowering him to demand the surrender of the prisoner, and bring him to Vienne, that he might undergo the sentence that had been passed upon him. Their Lordships of Geneva replied that it was not their custom to give up one charged with a crime till he had been either acquitted or condemned. However, confronting Servetus with the Viennese officer, they asked him whether he would remain with them or go back with the person who had come to fetch him. The unhappy man with tears in his eyes replied, "Messieurs of Geneva, judge me according to your good pleasure, but do not send me back with the hangman." This interference of the Roman Catholic authorities of Vienne hastened the fate of the prisoner. 3

The Council of Geneva assembled on the 26th of October to give judgment. The discussion was a stormy one. Perrin, with the Libertines, fought hard to save the accused; but the preponderating majority felt that the case could have but one issue. Servetus had already been condemned by the Popish tribunal of Vienne; the tribunal of the Swiss Reform had unanimously condemned him; the codes of Theodosius and Justinian, which still formed the basis of the criminal jurisprudence of Geneva, condemned him; and the universal opinion of Christendom, Popish and Protestant, held him to be worthy of death. To these considerations was added the horror his sentiments had inspired in all minds. Not only did his opinions outrage the fundamental doctrines of the then common creed of Christendom; they assailed with atrocious blasphemy the persons of the Trinity; and they tore up, in their last consequences, the roots of society, by striking down conscience within man, and the power of law without him. What day the Council acquitted Servetus, it pronounced the dissolution of the State, political and religious, and opened the flood-gates on Christendom of those horrible impieties and massacring crusades which had already inflicted fearful havoc in many of the provinces of Germany. Europe, they believed, would not hold them guiltless if they let loose this plague a second time. Therefore, without consulting Calvin, without even thinking of him, and viewing the question as a social rather than a theological one, and dealing with it as sedition rather than heresy for, says Rilliet, "the principles of order, as then understood, did not permit them longer to hesitate as to whether or not they should see in them [i.e., the opinions of Servetus] the crime of treason against society" 4 -the magistrates of Geneva closed their Diet of the 26th of October with a decree condemning Servetus to death. "Let him," so ran the decree of the Council, as described in the Register, "be condemned to be led to Champel, and there burned alive, and let him be executed tomorrow, and his books consumed." 5

We record with horror the sentence, but it is the sentence not of the magistrates of Geneva only, nor of the magistrates and pastors of Reformed Switzerland only: it is the sentence of the Christendom of that age, for the Inquisition on one side, and Melancthon on the other, are heard expressing their concurrence in it. At this supreme hour one man alone comes forward to attempt a mitigation of the punishment of Servetus. Who is that man? He is John Calvin. He earnestly interceded with the Council, not that the unfortunate victim might [335] be spared, but that the sword might be substituted for the fire; but he interceded in vain. "It is to him, notwithstanding," says Rilliet, "that men have always imputed the guilt of that funeral pile, which he wished had never been reared." 6

We must pursue this affair to its appalling and scandalous termination. Farel, who had been watching from Neuchatel the progress of the trial, came suddenly to Geneva at its close. He was present with the unhappy man when the message of death was brought him. Up till that moment Servetus had clung to the hope of acquittal. He was horror-struck when the dreadful reality disclosed itself to him. "He was at intervals," says Calvin, "like one mad-then he uttered groans, which resounded through his chamber-anon he began to howl like one out of his senses. In brief, he had all the appearance of a demoniac. At last his outcry was so great that he without intermission exclaimed in Spanish, striking his breast, 'Mercy!

mercy!'" A terrible picture! and one cannot but wish that, with its graphic touches, there had mingled a little more of that pity which it needs must awaken for the sufferer in the heart of every one who reads it. When his first paroxysm had subsided, Farel, addressing Servetus, besought him "to repent of his sins, and confess the God who had thrice revealed himself." 7 This appeal but rekindled the polemical pride of the unhappy man. Turning to the aged evangelist, he asked him to produce a single passage from Scripture where Christ was called the Son of God previous to his coming in the flesh. Farel quoted several such passages; but Servetus, though he had nothing to reply, remained unconvinced, and continued to mingle cries for mercy, and appeals to Christ as his Savior, with his disputation with Farel, in which he maintained that Christ was not eternal, nor otherwise the Son of God except as regards his humanity. 8

After this he requested, or at least consented, to see Calvin. The Reformer was accompanied to the prison by two members of Council, for it was just possible that the condemned would make a retractation, and the terrible necessity of his death be avoided. Being asked by one of the councillors what he had to say to Calvin, Servetus answered that he desired to ask his pardon. "I protest," replied the Reformer, "that I have never pursued against you any private quarrel." Mildly, yet with the utmost fidelity, Calvin went on to remind Servetus of the pains he had been at to prevent him plunging into these destructive errors; and he counselled him, even now, to turn to God, and cast himself by repentance and faith on his Son for pardon. 9 But Calvin had no better success than Farel; and, finding that he could effect nothing, he withdrew.

...

As yet Servetus was ignorant, that he was to die by fire. Calvin had earnestly besought the Council that the miserable man might be spared this terrible surprise, but he had pleaded in vain. ..." - The History of the Reformation, Volume II, Chapter 22 : Condemnation and Death of Servetus; by J.H. Merle D'Aubigne; pages 333-335, selected.​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... he treated the Genevans so badly that they through him out of town, but in the social chaos that ensued they invited him back so he could use his form of dictatorial repression to stabilize the social disaster the 'reform' had created. And there are the credible charges of his own private vices.

Again, nonsense. It is obvious you have never read an actual single history of these persons. Calvin (and others) was/were ejected from Geneva because of Roman Catholic minded political factions in the the chairs of the city-state (Council of Two Hundred, etc), as well as towns persons who wanted to continue in their licentious lifestyles, and who wanted freedom from Rome and Dukes, but did not want the reformation of life the Bible called for, and Calvin and Farel and others refused the Council to administer 'communion', because of the condition of the 'religious':

"... Calvin's theological code was followed by one of morals. There were few cities in Christendom that had greater need of such a rule than the Geneva of that day. For centuries it had known almost nothing of moral discipline. The clergy were notoriously profligate, the government was tyrannical, and the people, in consequence, were demoralised. Geneva had but one redeeming trait, the love of liberty. The institutions of learning were neglected, and the manners of the Genevans were as rude as their passions were violent. They revelled, they danced, they played at cards, they fought in the streets, they sung indecent songs, uttered fearful blasphemies; indulged, in short, in all sorts of excesses. It was clear that Protestantism must cleanse the city or leave it. Geneva was nothing unless it was moral; it could not stand a day. This was the task to which Calvin now turned his attention.

This introduces the subject of the sumptuary laws, which were sketched at this time, though not finished till an after-period. The rules now framed forbade games of chance, oaths and blasphemies, dances, 1 lascivious songs, farces, and masquerades. The hours of taverners were shortened; every one was to be at home by nine at night, and hotel-keepers were to see that these rules were observed by their guests. To these were added certain regulations with a view of restraining excess in dress and profusion at meals. All were enjoined [286] to attend sermon and the other religious exercises. 2

Even before the time of Calvin, under the Roman Church, most of these practices, and especially dances, had been forbidden under severe penalties. Forty years after his death, under Henry IV. of France, similar edicts were promulgated. 3 The British Government at this day adopts the principle of the Genevan regulations, when it forbids gambling, indecent pictures and plays, and similar immoralities; and if such laws are justifiable now, how much more so in Calvin's time, when there were scarcely any amusements that were innocent!

The second battle with the citizens proved a harder one than the first with the priests, and the reformation of manners a more difficult task than the reformation of beliefs. The citizens remembered the halcyon days they had enjoyed under their bishop, and contrasted them with the moral restraints imposed upon them by the Consistory. The reproofs which Calvin thundered against their vices from the pulpit were intolerable to many, perhaps to most. The population was a mixed one. Many were still Papists at heart; some were Anabaptists, and others were deeply tainted with that infidel and materialistic philosophy which had been growing quietly up under the shade of the Roman Church. The successful conflict the Genevans had waged for their political independence helped, too, to make them less willing to bow to the Protestant yoke. Was it not enough that they had shed their blood to have the Gospel preached to them? It was mortifying to find that very Protestantism which they had struggled to establish turning round upon them, and weighing them in its scales, and finding them wanting.

Loud and indignant cries were raised against Calvin for neglecting his office. Appointed to be an expositor of Scripture, who made him, asked his calumniators, a censor of morals and a reprover of the citizens? Religion, in the age gone by, had been too completely dissociated from morality to make the absurdity of this accusation palpable. The Libertines, as the oppositionists began now to be called, demanded the abolition of the new code; they complained especially of the "excommunication." "What!" said they, "have we put down the Popish confessional only to set up a Protestant one?" and mounting party badges, they wore green flowers in mockery of the other citizens, calling them "brothers in Christ." 4 The Government began to be intimidated by these clamours. The majority of the citizens being still on the side of the ministers, the Council ventured on issuing an edict, commanding the Libertines to leave the city. But it had not the courage to enforce its own order; and the Libertines, seeing its weakness, grew every day more insolent. At length the elections in February, 1538, gave a majority in their favor in the Council; three out of the four Syndics were on the side of the Libertines. 5 This turn of affairs placed the pastors in a position of extreme difficulty. They stood in front of a hostile Council, pushed on from behind by a hostile population. Calvin remained firm. His resolution was taken unalterably to save his principle, come what might to himself. He was determined at all hazards not to give holy things to unholy men; for he saw that with that principle must stand or fall the Reformation in Geneva.

While these intestine convulsions shook the city within, invasion threatened it without. The strifes of the citizens were the signal to their old enemies to renew their attempts to recover Geneva. The inhabitants fortified the walls, cast the superfluous bells into cannon, and placed them upon the ramparts. 6 Alas! this would avail but little, seeing they were all the while pulling down that which was their true defense. With their morality was bound up their Protestantism, and should it depart, not all their stone walls would prevent their becoming once more the prey of Rome.

At this stage the matter was still further embroiled by the interference of Bern. The government of that powerful canton, ambitious of assuming the direction of affairs at Geneva, counselled the Genevese to restore certain ceremonies which had been retained in the Bernese Reformation, but cast off in the Genevan one; among others, holidays, and the use of unleavened bread in the Communion. 7 Calvin and Farel demurred to the course recommended.

The moment the sentiments of the pastors became known, a vehement zeal seized the Libexines to have the Lord's Supper dispensed with unleavened bread. The Government decided that it should be as the Libertines desired. With Calvin a much greater question was whether the Communion should be given to these persons at all. [287] As Easter approached, the fury of the party increased. They ran through the streets at night vociferating and yelling. They would stop before the pastors' houses, calling out, "To the Rhone! to the Rhone!" and would then fire off their arquebuses. They got up a masquerade in which they parodied that very ordinance which their scrupulous consciences would not permit them to receive save with unleavened bread. Frightful confusion prevailed in Geneva. This is attested by eye-witnesses, and by those who had the best opportunities of knowing the truth of what they have narrated. "Popery had indeed been forsworn," says Beza, "but many had not cast away with it those numerous and disgraceful disorders which had for a long time flourished in the city, given up as it was for so many years to canons and impure priests." 8 "Nothing was to be heard," says Reset, "but informations and quarrels between the former and present lords (the old and new members of Council), some being the ringleaders, and others following in their steps, the whole mingled with reproaches about the booty taken in the war, or the spoils carried off from the churches." 9 "I have lived here," says Calvin himself, describing those agitations, "engaged in strange contests. I have been saluted in mockery of an evening before my own door, with fifty or sixty shots of arquebuses. You may imagine how that must asteroid a poor scholar, timid as I am, and as I confess I always was." 10 It was amid these shameful scenes that the day arrived which was to show whether the Libertines backed by the Council, or Calvin supported by his own great principle, would give way. ..."

... to be continued ...​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... he treated the Genevans so badly that they through him out of town, but in the social chaos that ensued they invited him back so he could use his form of dictatorial repression to stabilize the social disaster the 'reform' had created. And there are the credible charges of his own private vices.

... continued ...

On the morning of Easter Sunday, 1538, the great bell Clemence rung out its summons, and all the quarters of the city poured out their inhabitants to fill the churches. Farel ascended the pulpit of St. Gervais, Calvin occupied that of St. Peter's. In the audience before them they could see the Libertines in great force. All was calm on the surface, but a single word might let loose the winds and awake the tempest. Nevertheless they would do their duty. The pastors expounded the nature of the Lord's Supper; they described the dispositions required in those who would worthily partake of it; and appealing to the disorders which had reigned in the city in the past weeks, in proof that these were not the dispositions of the majority of those now assembled, they concluded by intimating that this day the Holy Supper would not be dispensed. Hereupon, outcries drowned the voice of the preachers. The uproar was specially great in St. Gervais; swords were unsheathed, and furious men rushed toward the pulpit. Farel waited with his arms crossed. He had long since learned to look on angry faces without trembling. Calvin in St. Peter's was equally resolute. Sooner should his blood dye the boards he stood upon, than he would be guilty of the profanation demanded of him. "We protest before you all," he said, "that we are not obstinate about the question of bread, leavened or unleavened; that is a matter of indifference, which is left to the discretion of the Church. If we decline to administer the Lord's Supper, it is because we are in a great difficulty, which prompts us to this course." ..."

Farel had borne the brunt of the tempest in the morning, it was to be Calvin's turn in the evening. On descending to the Church of Rive, the former Convent of St. Francis, near the shores of the lake, he found the place already filled with an assembly, many of whom had brought their swords with them. Whatever apprehensions the young Reformer may have felt, he presented to the assembly, which hung upon the edge of the storm, a calm and fearless front. He had not been more than eighteen months in their city, and yet he had inspired them with an awe greater than that which they felt even for Farel.

These two were men of the same spirit, as of the same office, and yet they were unlike, and the Genevans saw the difference. Farel was the man of oratory, Calvin was the man of power. In what attribute or faculty, or combination of faculties, his power lay, they would have had great difficulty in saying. Certainly it was not in his gestures, nor in his airs, nor in the pomp of his rhetoric, for no one could more sedulously eschew these things; but that he did possess power - calm, inflexible, resistless power - they all knew, for they all felt it. Farel's invectives and denunciations were terrible; his passion was grand, like the thunderstorms of their own Alps; but there was something in the noise that tempered his severity, and softened his accusations. Calvin never thundered and lightened. Had he done so it would have been a relief; the Genevans would have felt him to be more human and genial - a man of like passions with themselves; at least, of like passions with Farel, whom they regarded with a mixture of love and fear, and whom they could not help half-forgiving, even when he was rousing their anger by his reproaches. But in his terrible calmness, in his passionless reason, Calvin stood apart from, and rose above, all around him - above Farel - even above the Council, whose [288] authority was dwarfed before the moral majesty that seemed to clothe this man. He was among them like an incarnate conscience; his utterances were decrees, just and inflexible, like the laws of heaven themselves. Whence had he come, this mysterious and terrible man? Noyon was his birth-place, but what influences had moulded such a spirit? and what chance was it which had thrown him into their city to hold them in his spell, and rule them as neither bishop, nor duke, nor Pope had been able to rule them? They would try whether they could not break his yoke. For this end they had brought their swords with them.

The historians who were eye-witnesses of the scene that followed are discreet in their accounts of it. It did not end so tragically as it threatened, and instead of facts that would not redound to the honour of their city, they treat us to felicitations that the affair had no worse a termination. What the words were that evoked the tempest we do not know. It was not necessary that they should be strong, seeing the more violent the more welcome would they be. While Calvin is preaching we see a dark frown pass suddenly over the faces of the assembly. Instantly there come shouts and outcries; a moment after, the clatter of weapons being hastily unsheathed salutes our ears; the next, we are dazzled by the gleam of naked swords. The tempest has burst with tropical suddenness and violence. The infuriated men, waving their weapons in the face of the preacher, press forward to the pulpit. One single stroke and Calvin's career [290] would have been ended, and not his only - with him would have ended the career of Geneva as the new foothold of the Reformation. Farel had felt the burden too heavy for him; and had Calvin fallen, we know of no one who could have taken his place. What a triumph for Rome, who would have re-entered Geneva over the mangled corpse of the Reformer! But what a disaster to Europe, the young day of which would have been quenched in the blackness of a two-fold night - that of a rising atheism, and that of a returning superstition!

But the movement was not fated so to end. He who had scattered the power of emperors and armies when they stood in battle array against the Reformation, stilled the clamours of furious mobs when they rose to extinguish it. The same buckler that covered Luther in the Diet of Worms, was extended over the head of Calvin amid the glittering swords in the Church of Rive. In that assembly were some who were the friends of the Reformer; they hastily threw themselves between the pulpit and the furious men who were pressing forward to strike. This check gave time to the less hostile among Calvin's foes to recover their senses, and they now remonstrated with the more violent on the crime they were about to commit, and the scandal they would cause if they succeeded in their object. Their anger began to cool; first one and then another put back his sword into its sheath; and after some time calm was restored. Michael Roset, the chronicler and magistrate, who appears to have been present, says, with an evident sense of relief, "The affair passed off without bloodshed ;" and the words of the syndic Guatier, who reckoned its peaceable ending a sort of miracle, show how near it had been to having a very different termination, 11 The Reformer's friends did not think it prudent to leave him undefended, though the storm seemed to have spent itself. Forming an escort round him, they conducted him to his home.

On the morrow the Council of Two Hundred met, and pronounced sentence of banishment upon the two ministers. This sentence was ratified on the following day by the Council-General or assembly of the people. On the decision being intimated to Calvin, he replied with dignity, "Had I been the servant of man, I should have received but poor wages; but happy for me it is that I am the servant of him who never fails to give his servants that which he has promised them." The Council rested its sentence of banishment upon the question of "unleavened bread." Herein it acted disingenuously. The pastors had protested that the question of leavened or unleavened bread in the Eucharist was with them an open one. The real ground of banishment is one on which the magistrates of Geneva, for obvious reasons, are silent - namely, the refusal of Farel and Calvin to celebrate the Lord's Supper, on account of the blasphemies and immoralities indulged in by many of those who demanded admission to the Communion-table. Before being condemned, Calvin asked to be heard in his defense before the Council-General, but his request was refused. 12

It is important to mark, at this stage, that the principle on which the Reformer rested his whole scheme of Church government was - holy things are not to be given to the unholy. This principle he laboured to make inviolable, as being the germ, in the first place, of purity in the Church; and, in the second, of morality and liberty in the State. The principle was, as we have seen, on this its first attempt to assert itself, cast out and trodden under foot of an infidel democracy. That party, in the days of Calvin, was only in its first sprouting; it has since grown to greatness, and put forth its strength on a wider theater, and the world has seen it, particularly in France, pull down and tread into the dust kings and hierarchies. But Calvin's principle, being Divine, could not perish under the blows now dealt it. It was overborne for the moment, and driven out of Geneva in the persons of its champions; but it lifted itself up again, and, re-entering Geneva, was there, fifteen years afterwards, crowned with victory. ..." - The History of the Reformation, Volume II, Chapter 11: Sumptuary Laws - Calvin and Farel Banished; by J.H. Merle D'Aubigne; pages 285-292.​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

If Knox had not been part of the assassination team that murdered Cardinal Beaton...

Again, nonsense. John Knox was not "part of the assassination" team. Jesuit's always lie.

'Cardinal' David Beaton was a murderous, powerhungry covetous man, and God sent a prophecy by George Wishart. He (Beaton) had George Wishart (godly man who walked with God) burnt at the stake (after trying to ambush him earlier and send assassins, but Wishart escaped, as God also had warned the King of Israel, by Elijah, 2 Kings 6:8-11), and George Wishart, after being captured and given a mock trial, gave a prophecy just before he died by fire at the stake.

"... ATTEMPTS ON HIS LIFE

Nevertheless, at the cardinal's instigation, says Knox, a priest named Wighton took a sword, and concealing it under his gown mixed with the crowd as if he were a mere hearer, and stood waiting at the foot of the steps by which Wishart must come down. The discourse was finished, the people dispersed. Wishart, whose glance was keen and whose judgment was swift, noticed as he came down the steps a priest who kept his hand under his gown, and as soon as he came near him he said, "My friend, what would ye do?" At the same moment he laid hold of the priest's hand and snatched the weapon from him. The assassin fell at his feet and confessed his fault.

Swiftly ran the report that a priest had attempted to kill the reformer, and the sick who heard it turned back and cried, " Deliver the traitor to us, or else we will take him by force." And so indeed they rushed on him. But Wishart put his arms round the assassin. "Whosoever troubles him," said he, "shall trouble me, for he has hurt me in nothing." His friends however insisted that for the future one of them, in arms, should accompany him wherever he went.

“... [page 225] When the plague had ceased at Dundee, Wishart thought that, as God had put an end to that battle, he called him to another. It was indeed proposed that he should hold a public disputation. He inquired of the bishops where he should be heard. But first he went to Montrose "to salute the kirk there," and although sometimes preaching the Gospel, he was "most part in secret meditation, in the [page 225-226] which he was so earnest, that night and day he would continue in it."

While there, he received a letter purporting to be written by his friend the laird of Kynneir, who being sick desired him to come to him. But it was a trick of the cardinal. Sixty armed horsemen were lying in wait behind a hill to take him prisoner. He set out unsuspecting, but when he had gone some distance, he suddenly stopped in the midst of the friends who were accompanying him and seemed absorbed in deep musing. Then he turned and went back. "What mean you?" said his friends, wondering. "I will go no further," he replied: "I am forbidden of God. I am assured there is treason." Pointing to the hill he added, "Let some of you go to yon place, and tell me what they find." These brave men reported with all speed what they saw. "I know," said he, "that I shall end my life in that bloodthirsty man's hands, but it will not be of this manner." ...” - The Reformation in Europe in the time of Calvin. Volume VI (6) Scotland, Switzerland, Geneva, by the Rev. J. H. Merle D'Aubigne, D.D. Translated by William L. R. Cates, joint author of Woodward and Cate's 'Encyclopedia of Chronology'; editor of 'The Dictionary of General Biography', etc.; London: Longmans, Green, and CO. 1875; London: Printed by Spottiswoode and Co., New-Street Square and Parliament Street; page 225-226 (PDF 249) - https://archive.org/stream/historyreformat06daubuoft#page/n249/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyreformat06daubuoft#page/n248/mode/1up​

*******

LAST WORDS

“... [page 245 (PDF 268)] The cardinal and his accomplices beheld from the windows the martyr and the fire which was consuming him. The governor of the castle watching the flames exclaimed, "Take courage." Wishart answered, "This fire torments my body, but noways abates my spirit." Then catching sight of the cardinal at the window with his courtiers, he added, "He who in such state, from that high place, feedeth his eyes with my torments, within few days shall be hanged out at the same window to be seen with as much ignominy as he now leaneth there in pride." This was literally fulfilled about two months later.

He had hardly uttered those words when the rope was tightened about his neck, so that he lost the power of speaking. The fire reduced his body to ashes; and the bishops, full of steadfast hatred of this servant of God, caused an order to be published that same evening through all the town, that no one should pray for their victim under the [page 245-246 (PDF 268-269)] severest penalties. They knew what respect was felt for him by many even of the Catholics themselves.

There are people who say that religion is a fable. A life and a death such as those of Wishart show that it is a great reality. ...” The Reformation in Europe in the time of Calvin. Volume VI (6) Scotland, Switzerland, Geneva, by the Rev. J. H. Merle D'Aubigne, D.D. Transalted by William L. R. Cates, joint author of Woodward and Cate's 'Encyclopedia of Chronology'; editor of 'The Dictionary of General Biography', etc.; London: Longmans, Green, and CO. 1875; London: Printed by Spottiswoode and Co., New-Street Square and Parliament Street; page 245-246 (PDF 268-269) - https://archive.org/stream/historyreformat06daubuoft#page/n268/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyreformat06daubuoft#page/n269/mode/1up/

...
CHAPTER XV
CONSPIRACY AGAINST BEAUTON – HIS DEATH
(March to May 1546.) ...

Fullfillment:

“... [page 254 (PDF 277)] The cardinal fell under repeated blows, without a word heard out of his mouth except these, 'I am a priest! I am a priest! Fie, fie! All is gone!'

… his partizans only cried the louder, 'We shall never depart till we see him,' still persuaded that he was alive. Then one or two men took up the body, and bearing it to the [page 254-255 (PDF 277-278)] very window at which a little while before Beauton had sat to contemplate with gladness, and as if in triumph, the execution of the pious Wishart, exposed it there to the gaze of all. Beauton's friends and the populace, struck with amazement and terror by the unexpected sight, and remembering Wishart's prediction, dispersed in gloom and consternation. ...” The Reformation in Europe in the time of Calvin. Volume VI (6) Scotland, Switzerland, Geneva, by the Rev. J. H. Merle D'Aubigne, D.D. Transalted by William L. R. Cates, joint author of Woodward and Cate's 'Encyclopedia of Chronology'; editor of 'The Dictionary of General Biography', etc.; London: Longmans, Green, and CO. 1875; London: Printed by Spottiswoode and Co., New-Street Square and Parliament Street; page 254-255 (PDF 277-278) - https://archive.org/stream/historyreformat06daubuoft#page/n277/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/historyreformat06daubuoft#page/n278/mode/1up​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

Cranmer was Henry's foil to destroy the Church. He had a secret wife in Germany while he pretended to be a celibate priest.

Cranmer's first wife had died in childbirth (giving birth to a child), before he was a priest, and much later, after he was a priest, married (secretly) as it was still forbidden in England (by Law and religion) for priests to marry (Henry VIII was basically a Roman Catholic theologically, just under his own authority after breaking with the 'pope' outwardly). Others were put to death for it. Of course his marriage (lawful according to scripture) needed to be secret.

It was not as if Thomas Cranmer had multiple wives, and one was a secret wife. No, the secrecy lay in the fact, that it could have gotten him and her killed, even in England were it known.

Thomas Cranmer, as much as he loved the protestant reformation, was stuck between two worlds, since Henry VIII asked for him to take the place of Wolsey. It was not really a matter of choice, and Cranmer thought it best to take the position, and do what he could to help the reformation, all the while caught between real reform and Henry VIII's immovable position.

Henry VIII didn't need Cranmer to "destroy [Roman Catholicism]". Cranmer, though was instrumental in certain reformations in England, was seriously hampered by Henry VIII. Wolsey was his own downfall, and so also the 'popes' theirs. Even the Emperor Charles V had to put the 'popes' in check because of all the power plays going on.

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

...The faults of the so-called "reformers" are central to their apostasy.

Nonsense. Romanism is the fault. Look in the mirror and read some actual history of the popes of Rome if you are not too afraid to do so, along with their bloody wars, massacres (St. Bartholomew, I have ready to quote), and most of all, look at the doctrine and compare it to scripture and see the errors pointed out by God in that harlot system ...

 

[epostle1]

You are creating a rabbit hole, trying to defend your "glorious and holy" reformers who were a bunch of reprobates and Hippocrates. Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. If not, stop acting like a child. How does a bad instance 440 years ago justify your 2018 hatred?
Catholics are not afraid to admit the sins of the past. The pope has apologized many times for what was proven to be sinful, not for your stupid exaggerations. Breaking news!!! Sin is not doctrine!!!

STILL WAITING


FOR THE SDA TO APOLOGIZE
FOR THEIR COLLABORATION WITH
NAZI GERMANY

​

Estimates of Non-Combatant Lives Lost During the Holocaust

Ukrainians 5.5 - 7 million
Jews (of all countries) 6 million +
Russian POWs 3.3 million +
Russian Civilians 2 million +
Poles (Catholics) 3 million +
Yugoslavians 1.5 million +
Gypsies 200,000 - 500,000
Mentally/Physically Disabled 70,000- 250,000
Homosexuals Tens of thousands
Spanish Republicans Tens of thousands
Jehovah's Witnesses 2,500 - 5,000
Seventh Day Adventists 0

You can't see the significance of these statistics, THBE, your hate cult has robbed you of your ability to think for yourself.

It's not from a Catholic apologetic web site, not from any Catholic source. My understanding of your whore religion kissing the Nazi's butt comes from a SDA historian. I'm not posting it the second time.

​

Protestants and Catholics TODAY are not accountable for the sins of their forefathers, contrary to the opinions of psychotic babbling hate cults. The only group that blasphemes the Church worse than the SDA are satanists, which doesn't say much for you.

Go ahead, bury this post like you do with every post that exposes your falsehoods. People in here are smart enough to scroll up and find out what you are trying to hide.

Geobble would like you to have this for your demonizing efforts:

​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

The history is written in blood, and even cries out from the ground still, and will be avenged by God Himself in the day soon to come.

Catherine de Medici (a notorious family, and her history in connection with popes, well known and documented):

"... She was the daughter of Lorenzo de' Medici (II), Duke of Urbino, and Madeleine de la Tour d' Auvergne who, by her mother, Catherine of Bourbon, was related to the royal house of France. ... Left an orphan when only a few weeks old, Catherine had barely reached the age of thirteen when Francis I, King of France, eager to thwart the projects of the Emperor Charles V and to court the friendship of Clement VII, Catherine's uncle, arranged a marriage between Catherine and his second son Henry, Clement VII coming to Marseilles in October, 1533, for the ceremony. ... Dictatorial, unscrupulous, calculating, and crafty, the subtlety of her policy harassed all parties concerned and perhaps contributed to the aggravation of discord ... Moreover, being intensely superstitious, she surrounded herself with astrologers. ... Indeed her methods were so essentially egotistical as to border on cynicism ... a disciple of Machiavelli ..." - Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia, section C, Catherine de Medici; Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03443a.htm​

*******

"... This massacre of which Protestants were the victims occurred in Paris on 24 August, 1572 (the feast of St. Bartholomew), and in the provinces of France during the ensuing weeks ...

... Gregory XIII ordered a jubilee in celebration of both events and engaged Vasari to paint side by side in one of the Vatican apartments scenes commemorative of the victory of Lepanto and of the triumph of the Most Christian King over the Huguenots. Finally, he had a medal struck representing an exterminating angel smiting the Huguenots with his sword, the inscription reading: Hugonottorum strages. ..." - Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia, section S, Saint Bartholomew's Day; Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.- http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13333b.htm​

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Gregory_XIII_medal.jpg



https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Giorgio_Vasari_San_Bartolomeo.jpg

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

Again:

"... The massacres on St. Bartholomew's day are painted in the royal saloon of the Vatican at Rome, with the following inscription: Pontifex, Coligny necem probat, i.e., 'The pope approves of Coligny's death.' ..." - John Foxe's book of Martyrs, Chapter IV - http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/fox104.htm
​

Voltaire the consumate Jesuit (playing the Hegelian dialectic, and to set up Plato's republic) wrote:

"... If the persecuting of those who differ from us in opinion is a holy action, it must be confessed that he who had murdered the greatest number of heretics would be the most glorious saint in Heaven. If so, what a pitiful figure would be a man who had only stripped his brethren of all they had, and thrown them to rot in a dungeon, make, in comparison with the zealot who had butchered his hundreds on the famoous day of St. Bartholomew? This may be proved as follows:

The successor of St. Peter and his consistory cannot err; they approved, they celebrated, they consecrated the action of St. Bartholomew; consequently that action was holy and meritorious; and, by a like deduction, he who of two murderers, equal in piety, had ripped up the bellies of eighty Huguenot women big with child would be entitled to double the portion of glory of another who had butchered but twelve; ..." - Voltaire: 60+ Works in One Volume - Philosophical Writings, Novels, Historical Works, Poetry, Plays & Letters; Candide, A Philosophical Dictionary, A Treatise on Toleration, Plato's Dream, The Princes of Babylon, Zadig, The Huron, Socrates, The Sage and the Atheist, Dialogues, Oedipus, Caesar ... Published by Musaicum Books; 2017 OK Publishing; ISBN 978-80-7583-598-7 - https://books.google.com/books?id=BnNODwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false​

See also Voltaire's "Henriade, Canto 2" - https://archive.org/stream/henriadeanepicp00voltgoog#page/n7/mode/1up

Lord Acton (A Roman Catholic, "... at Cambridge he regularly attended Mass, and he received the last sacraments, at Tegernsee, on his death-bed. ..." - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01114a.htm ) wrote:

"... [page 115 (PDF 163)] The opinion that the Massacre of St. Bartholomew was a sudden and unpremeditated act cannot be maintained. . . .

“[page 116 (PDF 164)] By the month of February, 1572, the plan had assumed a practical shape. . . .

“[page 117 (PDF 165)] The court had determined to enforce unity of faith in France. An edict of toleration was issued for the purpose of lulling the Huguenots; but it was well known that it was only a pretense. Strict injunctions were sent into the provinces that it should not be obeyed; and Catherine said openly to the English envoy, ‘My son will have exercise but of one religion in his realm.’ On the twenty-sixth [of February] the king explained his plan to Mondoucet, his agent at Brussels: ‘Since it has pleased God to bring matters to the point they have now reached, I mean to use the opportunity to secure a perpetual repose in my kingdom, and to do something for the good of all Christendom. It is probable that the conflagration will spread to every town in France, and that they will follow the example of Paris, and lay hands on all the Protestants. . . . [page 117] I have written to the governors to assemble forces in order to cut to pieces those who may resist.’ The great object was to accomplish the extirpation of Protestantism in such a way as might leave intact the friendship with Protestant states. . . .

“[page 133 (PDF 181)] Salviati had written on the afternoon of the twenty-fourth [of August]. . . . [page 133 (PDF 181)] It was a fair sight to see the Catholics in the streets wearing white crosses, and cutting down heretics; and it was thought that, as fast as the news spread, the same thing would be done in all the towns of France. This letter was read before the assembled cardinals at the Venetian palace, and they thereupon attended the pope to a Te Deum in the nearest church. [page 134 (PDF 182)] The guns of St. Angelo were fired in the evening, and the city was illuminated for three nights. To disregard the pope’s will in this respect would have savored of heresy. Gregory XIII exclaimed that the massacre was more agreeable to him than fifty victories of Lepanto. For some weeks the news from the French provinces sustained the rapture and excitement of the court. It was hoped that other countries would follow the example of France; the emperor was informed that something of the same kind was expected of him. On the eighth of September the pope went in procession to the French church of St. Lewis, where three and thirty cardinals attended at a mass of thanksgiving. On the eleventh he proclaimed a jubilee. In the bull he said that forasmuch as God had armed the king of France to inflict vengeance on the heretics of the rebellion which had devastated his kingdom, Catholics should pray that he might have grace to pursue his auspicious enterprise to the end, and so complete what he had begun so well. . . ." - Lord Acton, The History of Freedom and Other Essays by John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, First Baron Acton; D.C.L., LL.D., Etc. Etc. Regius Professor of Modern History in the University of Cambridge; Edited with an Introduction by John Neville Figgis, Litt.D.; sometime Lecturer in St. Catherine's College, Cambridge; and Reginald Vere Laurence, M.A.; Fellow and Lecturer of Trinity College, Cambridge; Macmillan and Co., Limited; St. Martin's Street, London, 1919. - https://archive.org/stream/TheHistoryOfFreedom#page/n163/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/TheHistoryOfFreedom#page/n164/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/TheHistoryOfFreedom#page/n165/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/TheHistoryOfFreedom#page/n181/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/TheHistoryOfFreedom#page/n182/mode/1up/​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

Again:

St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre:

“... Saint Bartholomew's Day, Massacre of (2008) Encyclopædia Britannica Deluxe Edition, Chicago; Hardouin de Péréfixe de Beaumont, Catholic Archbishop of Paris a century later, put the number at 100,000, but "This last number is probably exaggerated, if we reckon only those who perished by a violent death. But if we add those who died from wretchedness, hunger, sorrow, abandoned old men, women without shelter, children without bread,—all the miserable whose life was shortened by this great catastrophe, we shall see that the estimate of Péréfixe is still below the reality." G. D. Félice (1851). History of the Protestants of France. New York: Edward Walker, p. 217. ...” - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Bartholomew's_Day_massacre#cite_note-33
​

*******

Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre:

"... A detailed recital of these horrors is not here to be expected. They fill a volume of Theodore De Beze. Jacques de Thou devotes to them several books of his history. Crespin, Jean de Serres, the memoirs of Montluc, of Tavanes, of Conde, of Lanoue, and of fifty others are full of them. Whoever wishes to investigate the details may seek for them there. Were we to attempt the task, the pen would again and again fall from our hand. ..." - History of the Protestants of France, from the Commencement of the Reformation to the Present Time. By G. De Felice.; Translated from the Second Revised and Corrected Edition, by Philip Edw. Barnes, Esq., B.A., F.L.S., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. London: George Routledge & Co., Farringdon Street. 1853. page 138 (PDF 166) - https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n166/mode/1up/​

*******

History of the Protestants of France, from the Commencement of the Reformation to the Present Time. By G. De Felice.; Translated from the Second Revised and Corrected Edition, by Philip Edw. Barnes, Esq., B.A., F.L.S., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. London: George Routledge & Co., Farringdon Street. 1853. pages throughout

"... [page 165 (PDF 193)] The day of Saturday was spent in preparations, and secret councils. The duke of Guise, who had speedily returned after feigning to depart, arranged matters with the sheriffs, the captains of the quartiers, and the Swiss. "Let every good Catholic," he said to them, "tie a strip of white linen round his arm, and wear a white cross in his hat."

The hour drew nigh. Catherine declared to Charles IX. that it was too late to go back; that the moment had come to lop off the gangrened limbs; and, recurring to the language of her cradle, as will happen under the dominion of powerful emotions: "E pieta," she said, "lor ser crudele, e crudelta lor ser pietoso (it is pity to be cruel to them, and it would be cruelty to show them pity),"

Charles still hesitated; a cold sweat stood upon his forehead. his mother struck a blow upon the point, on which he was most sensitive. She asked if by his irresolution he would have his courage called in question. The king was indignant at the thought of a suspicion of cowardice. He rose, and cried out: "Well, begin!" It was then half-past one in the morning.

In the king's chamber there were now only Catherine, Charles IX., and the duke of Anjou. All three preserved a sullen silence. The report of the first pistol was heard. Charles started, and sent word to the duke of Guise to precipitate nothing. It was too late. The queen-mother, distrusting the hesitation of her son, had commanded that the [page 165-166 (PDF 193-194)] hour for the signal should be anticipated. The great bell of saint Germain l'Auxerrois began to toll between two and three in the morning of Sunday, the 24th of August. At the sound of the tocsin, armed men rushed out from every door, shouting, "For God and the King!"

The duke of Guise, accompanied by his uncle, the Duke d'Aumale, the Chevalier d'Angouleme, and three hundred soldiers, hastened to the dwelling of the Admiral. They knocked at the first gate in the king's name. A gentleman opened it: he fell stabbed. The inner gate was then burst in. At the noise of firing Coligny and all his people got up. They attempted to barricade the entry to the apartments; but this feeble rampart crumbled before the onset of their aggressors.

The Admiral had invited his minister Merlin to pray with him. A servant hurried to him terror-striken: "Sir," cried he, "the house is broken into, and there are no means of resistance." "I have long been prepared to die," answered Coligny. "As for you, save yourselves if you can; for you cannot secure my life. I commend my soul to the mercy of God."

All reached the upper part of the house, except Nicolas Muss, his German interpreter. Coligny rested against the wall; his would prevented him from standing upright. The first who entered the room was a Lorraine, or German, named Behem, Besme, a servant of the duke of Guise. "Are you not the Admiral?" he demanded. "Yes, I am," replied Coligny; and looking without discomposure upon the naked sword of the assassin, [he added]: "Young man, you ought to consider my age and my infirmity; but you till not make my life shorter." Besme plunged his sword into his breast, and gave him a second blow upon the head. The others finished the murder with their daggers. *

Guise was waiting impatiently in the courtyard. "Besme, hast thou done it?" [he shouted]. "It is done, my lord," [was the reply given]. Monsieur le Chevalier would not believe it unless he saw it with his eyes; "Throw him out of the [page 166-167 (PDF 194-195)]

[* This Besme received the reward of his crime from the Cardinal de Lorraine, who permitted him to marry one of his natural daughters: a double disgrace for a priest to recompense such a man, and to have such a reward to bestow. (notation * end)] ..." -
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n194/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n195/mode/1up/​

... to be continued ...

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

History of the Protestants of France, from the Commencement of the Reformation to the Present Time. By G. De Felice.; Translated from the Second Revised and Corrected Edition, by Philip Edw. Barnes, Esq., B.A., F.L.S., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. London: George Routledge & Co., Farringdon Street. 1853. pages throughout ... continued ...

[page 166-167 (PDF 194-195)] window," [was, therefore, the command]. Besme and one of his companions lifted up the body of the Admiral, who still breathing, clutched the window-frame. They flung him into the courtyard. The duke of Guise, wiping off the blood from his face with a handkerchief, said: "I know him, it is he;" and kicking the dead body with his foot, he hastened into the street, exclaiming: "Courage, comrades; we have begun well--now for the rest; the king commands it."

Sixteen years and four months afterwards, on the 23rd of December, 1588, in the castle of Blois, the corpse of this same Henry of Guise was lying before Henry III., who, in like manner, kicked it in the face. Sovereign justice of God!

Coligny was fifty-five years and a half old. Since the peace of 1570, he every morning and evening read the sermons of John Calvin upon the book of Job, saying that this history was his help and consolation in all his troubles. he also spent several hours of the day in writing his memoirs. These papers having been brought to the council after the massacre of Saint Bartholomew, were burned by the king's order, lest they might increase regret for his death.

Some time after this event, when the English ambassador expressed his grief for the murder of Coligny, Catherine made answer to him: "Do you know that the Admiral recommended the king, as a matter of the last importance, to keep under the king of Spain, and also your mistress (Queen Elizabeth), as much as possible?" "Very true, madam," replied the ambassador; "he was a bad Englishman, but a good Frenchman."

Let us also cite a saying of Montesquieu: "The Admiral Coligny was assassinated, having only had the glory of the state at heart."

XIII.

We are willing, whilst fulfilling our task, to abridge as far as possible the details of the massacre of Saint Bartholomew.

When the sun of the 24th of August rose upon Paris, all was tumult, disorder, and carnage; rivers of blood flowed in the streets; corpses of men, women, and children blocked up the doorways; on all sides groans, blasphemies, death-cries, and imprecations, were heard; ruffians by thousands insulted their victims before butchering them, and then loaded [page 167-168 (PDF 195-196)] themselves with spoils; the poniard, the pike, the knife, the sword, the arquebuse, every weapon of the soldier and the brigand, were brought into the service of this execrable slaughter; and the vile populace running after the murderers, finished the Huguenots, by mutilating them and dragging them in the mire, by a cord round the neck, to have their share also in this feast of cannibals.

At the Louvre, the Huguenots, brought up one after another between a double line of halberts, fell bleeding before they reach the end; and the ladies of the court, well worthy to be the mothers, the wives, and the sisters of assassins, came to gloat over the bodies of the victims.

It has been remarked that of so many brave men, who had a thousand times faced death on the field of battle, there was but one, Taverny, who sought to defend himself; and even he was a lawyer. The rest presented their throats to the poniard like women. A crime so monstrous overwhelmed their minds, and paralyzed their hand; and before they could recover themselves, they were no more.

Some, however, who lived on the other side of the Seine, in the faubourgs Saint Germain, Montgomery, Rohan, Segur, and La Ferriere, had time to comprehend their position and to escape. it was then that the king, maddened with fury, seized an arquebuse and fired at Frenchmen. Two hundred and twenty-seven years afterwards, Mirabeau picked the arquebuse of Charles IX. out of the dust of centuries, to turn it against the throne of Louis XVI.

On the same Sunday morning, the king sent for Henry of Navarre and Henry of Conde. He said to them in a ferocious tone: "The mass, death, or the Bastille." after some resistance, the princes consented to make profession of the Romish faith; but neither the court nor the people believed in the sincerity of their abjuration.

The massacre lasted four days. It was necessary to clothe it with a pretext before France and Europe. At first it was endeavoured to throw the burthen upon the Guises, but they refused [to bear it]. Next a pretended conspiracy of the Huguenots against Charles IX. and his family was invented. There were tergiversations of every kind, fabrications, which could not be maintained for an hour, confessions, which were retracted on the following day, orders and counter-orders to [page 168-169 (PDF 196-197)] the governors in the provinces: a miserable play of the actors after the tragic scene.

On Thursday, when the blood of the victims deluged the streets of Paris, the clergy celebrated an extraordinary jubilee, and made a general procession. They even determined to consecrate an annual feast to a triumph so glorious; and whilst the (Roman) Catholic pulpits re-echoed with thanksgivings, a medal was struck with this legend: "Piety has awakened Justice!" The massacre of Saint Bartholomew was renewed in the provinces, and horrible to say, it lasted more than six weeks. ...

... The blow fell upon the provinces with a variable force. in those where the Reformed were few in number, as in Brittany, Picardy, Champagne and Burgundy, no great excesses were committed. In certain cantons of the provinces, on the contrary, where they were very numerous, as in [page 169-170 (PDF 197-198)] Saintonge, and in Lower Languedoc, they did not dare to attack them. It is important also to observe, that in general, Saint Bartholomew's day was nowhere so kept, but in the towns. This explains why so many Calvinists escaped death.

The faithful of Meaux were butchered in the prisons during several days, and the sword being too slow, iron hammers were employed. Four hundred houses, in the most handsome quarter of the town, were pillages and devastated.

At Troyes, the executioner had more humanity than the governor, who gave him the command to massacre the prisoners. "It is against my duty," said he, "for I have not learned to execute any one without a sentence of condemnation being first passed." There were other executioners, who, finding their hearts fail them in the midst of the butchery, sent for wine to strengthen them for their work.

At Orleans, where there still remained three thousand Calvinists, men on horseback cried throughout the streets: "Courage, friends, kill all, and then you shall pillage their goods." The most ruffianly were those who had abjured in the last wars; they parodied the psalms, whilst they immolated those whose faith they had forsworn.

At Rouen, many Huguenot took to flight; the rest were cast into prison. The massacre began only on the 17th September, and lasted four days. The prisoners were called over by their names, from a list given to the murderers. There perished, according to the relation of Crespin, near six hundred persons.

At Toulouse, the events of Paris were made known on Sunday, the 31st August. The gates of the town were instantly closed, and the Reformed, who had gone to celebrate their worship at the village of Castanet, were only admitted one by one, by little posterns. They were taken to the prisons and the convents. There they remained a month. It was not till 3rd October that they were executed, by order of the chief president Dafis. Three hundred perished, amongst whom were five councillors, who after they were killed, were hnged in their robes on the great elm, which stood before the court of the palace.

The massacre of Bordeaux was delayed like that of Toulouse, and during these hesitations, a Jesuit named Augier [page 170-171 (PDF 198-199)] ..." -
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n195/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n196/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n197/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n198/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n199/mode/1up/​

... to be continued ...

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

History of the Protestants of France, from the Commencement of the Reformation to the Present Time. By G. De Felice.; Translated from the Second Revised and Corrected Edition, by Philip Edw. Barnes, Esq., B.A., F.L.S., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. London: George Routledge & Co., Farringdon Street. 1853. pages throughout ... continued ...

"... [page 170-171 (PDF 198-199)] declaimed every day from his pulpit against the pusillanimity of the governor. At length, companies of assassins were organized: they had the name of "the red, or cardinal band," bestowed upon them.

The towns of Bourges, Angers, and many others, witnessed similar scenes. But these were trifling by the side of the massacres of Lyons: here there was a second Saint Bartholomew, more frightful still than that of Paris, beause it was conducted with a sort of regularity. The governor Mandelot gave orders that the Calvinists should be shut up in the prisons of the Archbishoprics, of the Cordeliers, and of the Celestins, and be slaughtered in detachments. The executioner of Lyons, like his brother of Troyes, refused to lend his hand to the work. "After sentence," said he, "I will do what I have to do; there are but too many such executioners as are needed residing in the town." A writer says upon this subject: "What a re-establishment of order it would have been, if in this unhappy city the governor had been the executioner, and the executioner the governor!"*

There perished at Lyons, according to some, eight hundred, according to others, thirteen hundred, fifteen hundred, ot eighteen hundred, Huguenots. The dwellers on the borders of the Rhone, in Dauphine, and in Provence, stood aghast at the sight of so many corpses floating on the waters, or thrown up on the banks of the river; many were tied to long poles, and horribly mutilated. "At Lyons," says Capilupi, a gentleman attached to the court of the pope, "thanks to the excellent order and singular prudence of M. de Mandelot, governor of the town, all the Huguenots were taken one after the other like sheep."†

The correspondence of Mandelot has recently been published. He expressed his deep regret to Charles IX. that a few Huguenots had escaped, and supplicated his majesty to grant him a share of the spoils of the dead. Lyons has witnessed other massacres, but we have not learned that the proconsuls of the Convention held out their hands to clutch the wages of blood.

What was the number of victims throughout France? De Thou says 30,000; Sully, 70,000; the bishop Perefixe, [page 171-172 (PDF 199-200)]

[*Aignan, Biblioth. etrangerem tome i. p, 229. † Le Stratageme de Charles IX. p. 178. (notations end)]​

[page 171-172 (PDF 199-200)] 100,000. This last figure is probably exaggerated, if we reckon those only who met with a violent death. But if there be added those who died of misery, hunger, grief, the aged, who were helpless and abandoned, women without shelter, children without bread, the many wretched beings, whose lives were shortened by this great catastrophe, it will be confessed that the number given by Perefixe is till below the truth.

The sensation produced by the massacre of Saint Bartholomew throughout Europe was immense. Men were unwilling to believe the first accounts. When they were confirmed, all the courts, all the churches, all the public places, every house resounded with acclamations; and there was not a hut, into which the deeds done on that day did not carry, according to the sentiments of the inhabitants, the exultations of joy, or the stupor of overwhelming grief.

Many thought, at first, that it was only the first scene of a vast conspiracy to exterminate all the Protestants of Europe. The Papacy, Philip II., and the court of Charles IX., in fact never ceased to talk of the complete extirpation of heretics: the power, not the will, was wanting.

At Rome, the news of the massacre, which Charles IX. had announced in ambiguous words to the legate, was expected, and received with transports of joy. The messenger was gratified with a present of a thousand pieces of gold. He brought a letter from the nuncio Salviati, written on the very day, the 24th August, in which this priest said to Gregory XIII, that "he blessed God to see his pontificate commence so auspiciously." The king Charles IX., and the queen Catherine, were praised for having shown so much prudence in extirpating this pestilent race, and for having so well chosen their time that all the rebels had been secured under lock and key, as in a dovecote (sotto chiave, in gabbia).

After having offered up solemn thanksgivings with the college of cardinals, the pope caused the guns of the castle of Saint Angelo to be fired, declared a jubilee, and struck a medal in honour to the great event. The Cardinal de Lorraine, who had gone to Rome on the election of the new pontiff, also celebrated the massacre bu a great procession to the [page 172-173 {PDF 200-201)] French church of Saint Louis. He caused an inscription to be written on the gates in letters of gold, in which he said that, "the Lord had granted the prayers, which he had offered to him for twelve years!"

Madrid shared in the rejoicings of Rome. Philip II. wrote to Catherine that this was the greatest and best news that could ever be announced to him. This prince, who has been surnamed "the Demon of the South," had other reasons for his joy besides fanaticism.

In the Low Countries, the duke of Alba cried out, on leaning the assassination of Coligny: "The Admiral is dead; there is a great captain the less for France, and a great enemy the less for Spain."

But how shall we relate the impression produced by the massacre of Saint Bartholomew in Protestant countries? it may be seen in the letters of Theodore de Beze, and others of his contemporaries, that, for more than a year, they could not chase from their minds that bloody and horrible image, and that they spoke of it with a trembling, which attested the profound shock which their souls [had sustained].

Germany, England, Switzerland, in witnessing the arrival of a multitude of fugitives appalled and half-dead, and on hearing from their mouth the narrative of the massacres, cursed the name of France. At Geneva, a day of abstinence and prayer was instituted, which has been kept up to this day. In Scotland, all the pastors preached upon the massacre of Saint Bartholomew; and the aged Knox, borrowing the language of the prophets, pronounced in a church at Edinburgh the following words: "The sentence is gone forth against the murderer, the king of France, and the vengeance of God will not be withdrawn from his house. His name shall be held in execration by posterity; and no on who shall spring from his loins, shall possess the kingdom in peace, unless repentance come to prevent the judgment of God." ... [page 173-174 (PDF 201-202)]

... [page 173-174 (PDF 201-202)] If all the circumstances of the massacre of Saint Bartholomew be well weighed,--the premeditation, the intervention of the court and of the councils of the king, the snares that were laid to entrap the Calvinists, the solemn oaths which had drawn them to Paris, the royal marriage ceremony stained with blood, the dagger put into the hands of the people by the chiefs of the state, the hecatombs of human victims immolated at a time of universal peace, the carnage prolonged for two months in the provinces, and lastly, the priests and the princes of the priests, ankle-deep in blood, lifting their hands to heaven to thank God,--if, we say, we ponder upon all these circumstance, we cannot escape the conviction that the slaughter of Saint Bartholomew is the greatest crime of the Christian era, since the invasion of the men of the North. The Sicilian Vespers, the extermination of the Albigeois, the tortures of the Inquisition, the murders by the Spaniards in the New World, odious [page 174-175 (PDF 202-203)] though they be, do not unite in the same degree the violation of all laws, human and divine. And frightful calamities have spring from this monstrous crime. Individuals may indeed commit crimes, which remain unpunished in this world; but dynasties, castes, and nations, never go unrewarded. …" - History of the Protestants of France, from the Commencement of the Reformation to the Present Time. By G. De Felice.; Translated from the Second Revised and Corrected Edition, by Philip Edw. Barnes, Esq., B.A., F.L.S., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. London: George Routledge & Co., Farringdon Street. 1853. pages 165-175 (PDF 193-203) -
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n198/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n199/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n200/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n201/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n202/mode/1up/
https://archive.org/stream/historyprotesta00flgoog#page/n203/mode/1up/​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

Again:

St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre:

Maximilian de Bethune; Memoirs of Maximilian de Bethune, Duke of Sully, Prime Minister of Henry the Great. Newly translated from the French edition of D. de L'Ecluse. To which is annexed, The trials of Francis Ravaillac, for the Murder of Henry the Great. In Five Volumes. Volume I. Edinburgh: Printed by A. Donaldson, and sold at his Shops the corner of Arundel Street, Strand, London, and Edinburgh. M.DCC.LXX (1770); pages 25-38 (some notations retained as noted), pages throughout

"... [page 25] The face of things was wholly changed upon the death of the Queen of Navarre; all the court appeared sensibly touched, and went into deep mourning. In a world, it is not giving too strong a name to all this conduct of Catherine and her son, to call it an almost incredible prodigy of dissimulation; feeling she could ensnare by it so discreet a man as the Admiral de Coligny, and that, notwithstanding a thousand circumstances concurring, one would think, to make him apprehend the danger that was approaching: for it was openly said, that Genlis and La-Noue, who had been sent to the assistance of the Prince of Orange, were defeated * by the connivance of the French court; which, while it was uncertain of success in the principal object of its dissimulation, could not think of risking all the consequences which that dissimulation might produce.

They were also informed of the conferences with the Queen-mother, and the principal ministers, held with Cardinal Alexandrin, nephew of Pope Pius V, and with the Guises; the last having been twice discovered conversing in mask with the King, the Queen mother, the Duke de Retz, and the Chancellor de Birague †. This was sufficient to shew what they ought to think of their pretended disgrace. In the death of the Queen of Navarre ‡, they thought they could perceive manifest [page 25-26 (notations skipped)] indications of poison. It passed for certain, that the wound the Admiral received came from the house of Villemur, preceptor to the Guises; and that the assassin had been met in his flight, upon a horse belonging to the King's stable. Even the guards that Charles * placed about the Admiral after this attempt, under pretext of securing his person, were, the greatest part of them, his declar- [page 26-27 (notations * recorded)]

[* All this is true, and proves, that this stratagem was the work of the Queen mother, and not that of the King. It is hard to say, what was her real intention in striking this stroke; whether she sought to get rid of a man who possessed too much power over the King's mind, and was capable of ruining her design of exterminating all the Huguenots; or whether, if the Admiral had died of this wound, she would have confined her vengeance to his single death; or, lastly, whether she expected the noise of this assassination would excite the Calvinists in Paris to revolt, and by that means furnish her with the occasion she wanted, to fall upon them with a high hand, for which her party was already prepared. Many expedients were proposed in the council to give a pretense for attacking them; amongst others, the assault of an artificial fort built in the Louvre, which would afford them an opportunity of turning the feigned slaughter into a real one against the Huguenots. An last, they resolved to put them all to the sword in the night.

The Admiral lodged in the street Bedisy in an inn, which is called at present the Hotel S. Pierre. The chamber where we was murdered is still shewn there. (notation * ended)]
​

[page 26-27] [declar-]ed enemies. It was no less certain, that all the citizens of Paris were furnished with arms, which, by the King's order, they kept in their houses.

The most clear-sighted among the Huguenots, yielding to proofs so convincing, quitted the court, and Paris itself, or lodged at least in the suburbs. Of this number were Mess. de Langoiran, de Frontenay, the Viscount de Chartres, de Loncaunay, de Rabodanges, Du-Breuil, de Segur, de Say, Du-Touchet, Des Hayes, de Saint-Gelais, de Chouppes, de Beauvais, de Grandriem se, St. Estienne, d'Arnes, de Boisec, and many other gentlemen of Normandy, and Poitou *. Happily my father was one of those, whose life was preserved by a wise distrust. When they were pressed to come nearer the court, they replied, that they found the air of suburbs was better for their health, and the air of the fields still better than that of the suburbs. When they were informed, that of Bishop of Valence, in taking leave of the King for his embassy to Poland, had penetrated into the secret, and been indiscreet enough to reveal it to some of his friends, and that they had intercepted letters sent to Rome by the Cardinal de Peleve, in which he unveiled all this mystery to the Cardinal de Lorrain; then it was, that these gentlemen redoubled their importunity with the King of Navarre, either to quit Paris himself, or at least to permit them to retire to their own homes. To their advice the Prince opposed that which had been given him by a number of other persons, and even in the Protestant party; for where are not traitors to be found? They warned him to be distrustful; they noted to him the names of all these who had been gained over by [page 27-28 (* notations skipped)] the Queen-mother to deceive him. He listened to nothing. The Admiral * appeared no less incredulous: his bad destiny began by blinding, to destroy him. Happy, if he had had the prudence of the Marechal de Montmorency, whom they could never draw from Chantilly, although the King incessantly plied him to partake in the favour of the Admiral, and to continue near his person, to aid him in his counsels.

If I sought to augment the horror universally excited by an action so barbarous † as that of [page 27-28, † notation recorded] ..." - https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/25/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/26/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/27/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/28/mode/1up​

... to be continued ...

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

... continued ...

Maximilian de Bethune; Memoirs of Maximilian de Bethune, Duke of Sully, Prime Minister of Henry the Great. Newly translated from the French edition of D. de L'Ecluse. To which is annexed, The trials of Francis Ravaillac, for the Murder of Henry the Great. In Five Volumes. Volume I. Edinburgh: Printed by A. Donaldson, and sold at his Shops the corner of Arundel Street, Strand, London, and Edinburgh. M.DCC.LXX (1770); pages 25-38 (some notations retained as noted), pages throughout

[page 27-28, † notation recorded] [(* notation skipped); † What M. de Sully says of the massacre ought not to be thought too severe. "An execrable action," cries Perefixe, "that never had, and, I trust God, never will have its like." Pope Pius V. was so much afflicted at it, that he shed tears; but Gregory XIII, who succeeded him, ordered a public thanksgiving to God for this massacre to be offered at Rome, and sent a legate to congratulate Charles IX, and to exhort him to continue it. The following is a short account of the massacre. All the necessary measures having been taken, the ringing of the bells of St. Germain l'Auxerrois, for matins, was the signal for beginning the slaughter. The Admiral de Coligny was first murdered, in the midst of his servants, by Besmes, a German, and a domestic of the Duke of Guise, and others; the Duke himself, and the Chevalier de Guise, staying below in the court. His body was thrown out of the window. They cut off his head, and carried it to the Queen-mother, together with his box of papers; among which, it is said, they found the memoirs of his own times, composed by himself. After they had ordered all sorts of indignities to the bleeding carcase, it was hung on the gibbet of Montfaucon, whence the Marechal de Montmorency caused it to be taken down in [page 28-29, notations continue] the night, and buried at Chantilly. The whole house of Guise had been personally animated against the Admiral, ever since the last assassination of Claude Duke of Guise, by Poltrot de Mere, whom they believed to have been incited to this crime by him; and, to say the truth, the Admiral was never able to clear himself of this imputation. If this butchery (as many people are fully persuaded) was only an effect of the Guises resentment, who advised the Queen-mother to it, with a view of revenging their own quarrel; it must be confessed, that no particular person ever drew so severe a vengeance for an offense. All the domestics of the Admiral were afterwards slain; and, at the same time, the King's emissaries began the slaughter in all quarters of the city. The most distinguished of the Calvinists who lost their lives, were Francis de la Rochefoucault, who having been at play part of the night with the King, and finding himself seized in bed by men in masks, thought it was the King and his courtiers who came to divert themselves with him: Anthony de Clermnot, Marquis de Resnel, murdered by his own kinsman Lewis de Clermont of Bugy d'Amboise, with whom he had a law-suit for the marquisate of Clermont; Charles de Quellenec, Baron of Pont in Bretagne, whose dead body excited the curiosity of the ladies of the court, on account of a process carried on by his wife, Catherine de Parthenay, daughter and heiress of John de Soubize; Francis Nompar de Cammont, murdered in his bed betwixt his two sons; one of whom was stabbed by his side, but the other, by counterfeiting himself dead, and lying concealed under the bodies of his father and brother, escaped: Teligny, son in law to the admiral: Charles de Beaumanoir de Lavardin; Antony de Marasin, Lord of Guerchy; Beaudisner, Pluviaut, Berny, Du Briou, governor to the Marquis of Conty; Beauvais, governor to the King of Navarre, Colombieres, Francourt, &c. The Count de Mongomery was pursued by the Duke of Guise as far as Montfort L'Amaury. The King pardoned the Viscounts of Grammont and Duras, and Gamache and Beuchavannes. The three brothers of the Marechal de Montmorency were also spared, through fear that he might thereafter revenge their death. See the historians and other writers. Read also that fine description of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, by M. de Voltaire, in his Henriade, Canto 2. (notation † ended)]​

[page 27-28] [as that of] 24th of August 1572, too well known by the name of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, I should in this place expiate upon the number, the quality, the virtues, and the talents of those who were inhumanly butchered on this horrible day as well in Paris as in all the rest of the kingdom, I should mark at least some part of the reproaches, the ignominious treatments, and the detestable devices of cruelty, which aimed, in giving death, to inflict [page 29-30] thousand stabs, as sensible as death itself to the unhappy victims. I have the pieces still in my hands, that vouch the instances of the court of France with the neighbouring courts, to imitate its example against the Reformed, or at least to refuse any asylum to all these unfortunate people. But I prefer the honour of the nation to the malignant pleasure which particular person might draw from a detail, in which they would find the names of those who forgot humanity so far, as to imbrue their hands in the blood of their fellow-citizens, and of their proper parents. I even would, if it were possible, bury for ever the memory of a day for which the divine vengeance punished France, by six and twenty successive years of disaster, carnage, and horror. One cannot help judging after this manner, when he considers all that passed from that fatal moment till the peace of 1598. It is even with regret, that I insist upon the part which regards the prince who is the subject of these memoirs, and upon what of it concerned myself.

I had gone to be betimes in the evening, and felt myself awakened about three hours after midnight, by the sound of all the bells, and the confused cries of the populace. My governor St. Julian, with my valet de chambre, went hastily out to know the cause; and I never afterwards heard more of these two men, who, without doubt, were among the first that were sacrificed to the public fury. I continued alone in my chamber, dressing myself, when, in a few moments, I saw my landlord enter, pale, and astonished. He was of the Reformed religion, and having learned what the matter was, had resolved to go to mass, to save his life, and preserve his house from being pillaged. He came to persuade me to do the same, and to take me with him. I did not think proper to follow him, but resolved to try if I could gain the college of Burgundy, where I studied, notwithstanding the di- [page 30-31] [di-] stance it was from the house where I lodged, which made the attempt very perilous. I put on my scholar's robe, and taking a large prayer-book under my arm, I went down. Upon entering the street, I was seized with horror at the sight of the furies, who rushed from all parts, and burst open the houses, bawling out, "Slaughter, slaughter, massacre the Huguenots." And the blood which I saw shed before my eyes redoubled my terror. I fell into the midst of a body of guards; they stopped me, questioned me, and were beginning to use me ill, when, happily for me, the book that I carried was perceived, and served me for a passport. Twice after this I fell into the same danger, from which I extricated myself with the same happiness. At last I arrived at the college of Burgundy, where a danger far greater than any I had yet met with awaited me. The porter having twice refused me entrance, I remained in the midst of the street, at the mercy of the furies, whose numbers increased every moment, and who were evidently in quest of their pray, when I bethought myself of calling for the principal of the college, La Faye, a good man, who loved me tenderly. The porter, gained by some small pieces of money which I put into his hand, did not fail to make him come. This honest man made me go into his chamber, where two inhuman priests, whom I heard make mention of the Sicilian vespers *, wanted to force me from him, that they might cut me in pieces, saying, the order was, to slaughter to the very infants at the breast. All that he could do was, to conduct me secretly to a remote closet, where he locked me up. I was there confined three days, uncertain of my destiny, receiving succour only from a domestic belonging to this [page 31-32, * notation recorded]

[* In the year 1282, the Sicilians murdered all the French in the island. The bell for vespers was the signal. (notation * end)] ..." -
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/28/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/29/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/30/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/31/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/32/mode/1up
​

... to be continued ...

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

... continued ...

​

Maximilian de Bethune; Memoirs of Maximilian de Bethune, Duke of Sully, Prime Minister of Henry the Great. Newly translated from the French edition of D. de L'Ecluse. To which is annexed, The trials of Francis Ravaillac, for the Murder of Henry the Great. In Five Volumes. Volume I. Edinburgh: Printed by A. Donaldson, and sold at his Shops the corner of Arundel Street, Strand, London, and Edinburgh. M.DCC.LXX (1770); pages 25-38 (some notations retained as noted), pages throughout

[page 31-32] [to this] charitable man, who brought me from time to time something to preserrve my life.

At the end of that term, the prohibition for murdering and pillaging any more of the Protestants being published, I was taken from my cell; and immediately after, I saw Ferriere and La Vieville, two soldiers of the guard who were my father's creatures, enter the college. They came to know what had become of me, and were armed, without doubt, to rescue me by force where-ever they should find me. They gave my father a relation of my adventure; and eight days after, I received a letter from him, in which he acquainted me how greatly he had been alarmed on my account, but advised me however to continue in Paris, which the Prince, my master, was not at liberty to abandon: only not to expose myself to an evident danger, I should resolve to do what the prince himself had done, meaning that I ought to go to mass. In effect, the King of Navarre had found no other means to save his life. He was awaked, with the Prince of Conde, two hours before day, by a multitude of soldiers, who rushed boldly into the chamber, in the Louvre, where they lay, and insolently commanded them to dress themselves, and attend the King. They were forbid expressly to take their swords; and as they went out, they saw several of their gentlemen * massacred disrespectfully before their eyes. Charles waited for them, and received them with a visage and eyes in which fury was painted: he ordered them, with the oaths and blasphemies which were familiar to him, to quit a religion that [page 32-33, * notation skipped]

[Page 32-33] had only been taken up, he said, to serve as a pretext for their rebellion. The condition to which these princes † were reduced, could not hinder them from discovering that they should obey him with pain: so that the wrath of the King became immoderate. He told them, in an imperious and furious tone, "That he would no longer be contradicted in his sentiment by his subjects; that they, by their example, should teach others to revere him as the image of God, and cease to be enemies to the images of his mother." he ended by declaring, that if they did not go that moment to mass, he was forthwith to give orders to treat them as criminals guilty of treason against divine and human majesty. the manner in which these words were pronounced, not permitting them to doubt but that there were sincere, they bended under violence, and did what was exacted. Henry was even obliged to send an edict into his dominions, by which the exercise of any other religion but the Romish was forbidden. Though this submission secured his life, in other respects he fared for it but little the better. He was subjected to a thousand caprices and a thousand insults from the court; at times free, oftener closely confined, and treated as a criminal. Sometimes his domestics were permitted to see and to serve him, then all on a sudden we would be prohibited to appear.

At such times I employed my leisure as usefully as possible. I was no longer at liberty from this time forth for learned languages, or whatever is called studies. This application, which my father [page 33-34, notation * skipped]

[page 33-34] had always strongly recommended to me, became impossible when once I approached the court. It was with regret I parted with an excellent preceptor, to whose care my father had entrusted my education: he himself perceiving he could be no longer useful, requested to retire. From his hands I passed into those of one called Chretien, whom the King of Navarre kept in his train, and enjoined to teach me mathematics and history: two sciences which soon consoled me for those I renounced, because I felt that inclination for them, which I have ever since preserved: the rest of my time was employed in learning to write and read well, and in forming myself to exercises proper to give gracefulness to the body. It was in these principles, joining still a greater attention to form the manners, that the method of educating youth consisted, which was known to be peculiar to the King of Navarre, because he himself had been brought up in that manner. I followed it till I was sixteen years of age, when the conjuncture of the times throwing us, both him and me, into the tumult of arms, without almost the hope of coming out of it, these exercises necessarily gave place to such as related solely to war, which (renouncing all others) I began with that of the arquebuse. All that a young man can then do, is to improve his heart by what he is obliged to with-hold from his understanding: for even amidst the hurry and din of arms, there are not wanting, to him who knows how to look them out, excellent schools of virtue and politeness. But unhappy, and even all his life, is he, who being engaged in a profession so fatal to youth, is deficient in strength or inclination to resist bad examples. Though he should have the good fortune to preserve himself from all shameful vice, how shall he instruct and fortify himself in the principles that wisdom dictates alike to the private man and the prince' that virtue be so effectually wrought into [page 34-35] habit by practice, that no virtuous action can ever be found painful; and that when reduced to the necessity of saving all all by a crime, or of losing all by a good action, the heart may even be a stranger to the interior struggles of duty and inclination?

It was not long before Charles felt violent remorse for the barbarous action to which they had forced him to lend his name and authority. From the evening of the 24th of August, he was observed to groan involuntarily at the recital of a thousand strokes of cruelty, which every one made a merit of in his presence. Of all those who were about the person of this prince, none had so great a share of his confidence as Ambrose Pare. This man, who was only his surgeon, had contracted with him so great a familiarity, though he was a Huguenot, that, on the day of the massacre, this Prince having said, that it was at that hour that all the world must become Catholic; Pare replied without emotion, "By the light of God, Sire, I cannot believe but you remember to have promised never to command me four things, namely, to enter into my mother's womb, to be present in a day of battle, to quit your service, or to go to mass." The King took him aside, and opened himself to him upon the trouble with which he felt himself agitated. "Ambrose," said he to him, "I know not what has befallen me these two or three days past, but I feel my mind and body all as much disordered as it I had a fever. I think at every moment, as well when awake as asleep, that these massacred bodies present themselves to me, hideous faces, and covered with blood. I wish from my heart, that the infirm and the innocent had not been taken in." The order which was published the day following to discontinue the slaughter, was the fruit of this conversation. ..." -
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/31/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/32/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/33/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/34/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/35/mode/1up
​

... to be continued ...

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Prove the Pope sanctioned the Bartholomew Massacre, and prove the queen of France had no right to defend her country against the Huguenots, whom you love so dearly. ...

... continued ...

​

Maximilian de Bethune; Memoirs of Maximilian de Bethune, Duke of Sully, Prime Minister of Henry the Great. Newly translated from the French edition of D. de L'Ecluse. To which is annexed, The trials of Francis Ravaillac, for the Murder of Henry the Great. In Five Volumes. Volume I. Edinburgh: Printed by A. Donaldson, and sold at his Shops the corner of Arundel Street, Strand, London, and Edinburgh. M.DCC.LXX (1770); pages 25-38 (some notations retained as noted), pages throughout

[page 35] The King even believed, that his honour was concerned to disavow all publically, as he did by the [page 35-36] letters-patent which he sent into the provinces. He there threw all upon the Guises, and would have had the massacre pass for an effect of their hatred against the Admiral. The particular letters which he wrote on this subject to England, Germany, Switzerland, and other neighbouring states, were conceived in the same terms.

Doubtless it was the Queen-mother and her council that made the King comprehend the consequence of so formal a disavowal: for, at the end of eight days, his sentiments and language were so greatly changed, that he went to hold his bed of justice in the parliament, to order other letters-patent to be registered; the contents of which were, that nothing was done on the 24th of August but by his express order *, and to punish the Huguenots; to each of whom, I mean the principals, a capital crime was imputed, in order, if possible, to give the name and colour of an execution of justice to a detestable butchery. These letter were addressed to the governors of provinces, with an order to publish them, and to pursue the rest of the pretended criminals. I ought here to make honourable mention of the Counts de Tende, and de Charny; of Mess. de Mandelot, de Gordes, de Saint-Heran, and de Carogue, who openly refused to execute any such order in their government. The Viscount d'Ortez, governor of Bayonne, had resolution enough to answer Charles, who had wrote him [page 36-37, notation * recorded]

[* Nothing is more certain, than that, during the massacre, he was seen with a carabine in his hand, which, 'tis said, be fired upon the Calvinists that were flying. The last Marechal de Tesse was, in his youth, acquainted with an old man of ninety years of age, who had been page to Charles IX. and often told him, that he himself had loaded that Carabine. It is also true, that this prince also went with his court to view the body of the Admiral, which hung by the feet with a chain of iron to the gallows of Montfaucon; and one of his courtiers observing it smelt ill, Charles replied, As Vitellus had done before him, "The body of a dead enemy always smells well." Voltaire's Henriade, p.32, & 37 (notation * end)]​

[page 36-37] with his own hand, "That on this point he must not expect any obedience †."

The number of Protestants massacred during the eight days, in all the kingdom, amounted to 70,000. This crushing blow conveyed such a sensible terror into the party, that it believed itself extinct, and talked no longer but of submitting, or flying into foreign countries. A vigorous and unexpected stroke broke yet once this resolution. Renier *, a gentleman of the Reformed religion, having, by a kind of miracle, escaped out of the hands of the Lord de Vezins, his most cruel enemy, saved himself, with the Viscount de Gourdon, and about eighty horse, and came to Montauban. he found this city under such a consternation, and so little in a condition to defend itself against the troop of Montluc, which approached, that, daring to advise the inhabitants to hold out, he himself run the risk [page 37-38, notation † recorded] ..."

[† Claude de Savoy, Count of Tende, saved the lives of all the Protestants in Dauphine. When he received the King's letter, by which he was directed to destroy them, he said, That could not be his Majesty's order. ----- Eleonor de Chabot, Count of Charny. Lieutenant-General in Burgundy. There was only one Calvinist murdered at Dijon. ----- Francis de Mandelot, governor of Lyon: he was resolved to save the Reformed; whom nevertheless, were all massacred in the prisons where he had put them for security. M. de Thou says, he only feigned ignorance of this barbarity. ----- Bertrand de Simiane, Lord of Gordes, a man greatly esteemed. ----- N. de S. Heran de Montmorin, governor of Auvergne: he positively refused to obey, unless the King was present in person. ----- Tanneguy Le-Veneur, Lieutenant General in Normandy, a man full of probity and humanity: he did all that he could to preserve the Protestants at Rouen; but he was not master of it. ----- N. Viscount d'Ortez, governor of all that frontier. See his answer to the King, "Sire, I have communicated your Majesty's orders to your faithful inhabitants, and to the troops in the garrison: I found there good citizens, and brave soldiers, but not one executioner," De Thou, lib. 52 & 53. D'Aubigne, vol. 2, book I. &c. (notation † end; notation * skipped)]​

[page 37-38] of being delivered up to Montluc; which obliged him to leave Montauban precipitately. This little troop fell in with a party of 450 horse, belonging to the army of Montluc, and, seeking to die gloriously, performed such prodigious acts of valour, that they cut in pieces the whole party. Renier returned to Montauban with the good news; he was now obeyed, and they shut the gates upon Montluc. This resistance, and the resolution of Montauban, being communicated from one to another, thirty towns followed its example, and conducted themselves in a manner that the Protestants (beyond their most aspiring hopes) obliged the Catholics to keep themselves on the defensive.

The latter had at first turned all their forces against Rochelle and Sancerrem which, taking advantage of the general fear, they invested. These enterprises did not succeed. ..." - Maximilian de Bethune; Memoirs of Maximilian de Bethune, Duke of Sully, Prime Minister of Henry the Great. Newly translated from the French edition of D. de L'Ecluse. To which is annexed, The trials of Francis Ravaillac, for the Murder of Henry the Great. In Five Volumes. Volume I. Edinburgh: Printed by A. Donaldson, and sold at his Shops the corner of Arundel Street, Strand, London, and Edinburgh. M.DCC.LXX (1770); pages 25-38 (some notations retained as noted) - https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/35/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/36/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/37/mode/1up
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofmaximil01sull#page/38/mode/1up​

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

... Breaking news!!! Sin is not doctrine!!!...

The man of sin increases all manner of sin, for it is the doctrines that lead to its adulteries, thefts, murders, and all else:

“CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF MARTIN LUTHER;

Exsurge Domine; Bull of Pope Leo X issued June 15, 1520 ...

... In virtue of our pastoral office committed to us by the divine favor we can under no circumstances tolerate or overlook any longer the pernicious poison of the above errors without disgrace to the Christian religion and injury to orthodox faith. Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows: …

… 33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit. ..." - Exsurge Domine; Condemning the Errors of Martin Luther; Pope Leo X - 1520 - http://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10exdom.htm​

It is Roman Catholicism's doctrine that leads to the terrible sins of its adherents.

 

[Jay Ross]

It is Roman Catholicism's doctrine that leads to the terrible sins of its adherents.

That, sadly, can be said of all churches' doctrine. It is usually doctored to suit the purpose of the church in question.

 

[epostle1]

THBE,
You are trying to entice me into a rock throwing contest. Exsurge Domine does not apply to today's Church. I've tried to explain to you the current teaching and attitude the Church has towards other churches, but it threatens your false paradigms. Manipulating me to condemn Protestantism is playing into your hands, because then you will have more ammunition to condemn Protestants, which your hate cult condemns for worshiping on Sunday.
Once again, you cite an encyclical with no historical context.

Wounds to unity (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:
Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271
818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

Toward unity

820 "Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time."277 Christ always gives his Church the gift of unity, but the Church must always pray and work to maintain, reinforce, and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her. This is why Jesus himself prayed at the hour of his Passion, and does not cease praying to his Father, for the unity of his disciples: "That they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be one in us, . . . so that the world may know that you have sent me."278 The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit.279

Footnotes:
269 UR 3 § 1.
270 Cf. CIC, can. 751.
271 Origen, Hom. in Ezech. 9,1G 13,732.
272 UR 3 § 1.
273 LG 8 § 2.
274 UR 3 § 2; cf. LG 15.
275 Cf. UR 3.
276 Cf. LG 8.
277 UR 4 § 3.
278 Jn 17:21; c
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm

The text above is invisible to hate cultists. They can never learn to cite the catechism properly because their minds are controlled by the Satanic Day Adventists.

JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church
JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church

2. The Doctrine of Justification as Ecumenical Problem

13.Opposing interpretations and applications of the biblical message of justification were in the sixteenth century a principal cause of the division of the Western church and led as well to doctrinal condemnations. A common understanding of justification is therefore fundamental and indispensable to overcoming that division. By appropriating insights of recent biblical studies and drawing on modern investigations of the history of theology and dogma, the post-Vatican II ecumenical dialogue has led to a notable convergence concerning justification, with the result that this Joint Declaration is able to formulate a consensus on basic truths concerning the doctrine of justification. In light of this consensus, the corresponding doctrinal condemnations of the sixteenth century do not apply to today's partner.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p..._31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

Putting Exsurge Domine in the toilet the way you do won't even impress the Lutherans.

THBE, your relentless attacks on the Catholic Church proves to me that what you do parallels the same mockery as Satanists. The difference between you and them is that they blaspheme with rituals.
You need a competent deprogrammer and a psychiatrist.



We have so much in common,
how about a date?