The Catholic Church

[CatholicCrusader]

The following is a thread started by a friend of mine, and re-posted with his permission:

The Catholic Church

Here I will like to address the views of Catholicism on the nature of the Church. I hope this becomes a thread only to clarify what we believe not to challenge it. There is plenty of places here where every conceivable Catholic position is challenged. If you do not understand something, please ask or contribute if you are Catholic or Protestant who knows our doctrine.

Please receive this as an attempt to clarify our doctrine, not convince you of anything. I want to start with apostolic succession as that is such a foundational view of our faith.

I. Apostolic Succession:

Apostolic succession was instituted by Christ precisely because individuals going on their own to scripture will disagree on the meaning of a doctrine.

It is interesting that when Paul spoke against quarrels and divisions in the Church he rejected those who said "I am of Paul" or "I am of Apollos" but also those who said "I am of Christ'! From the beginning, the Church as a whole [all its ministers under Christ] was the embodiment of truth and life.

Christ came to preach the Gospel and establish his Church as "pillar and foundation of the truth." We believe that such succession is demonstrable in Scripture and was the great weapon of Christians against heretics.

Now, the Scriptures do teach that bishops became the successors to the Apostles.

Besides Matthias, the one chosen to succeed Judas, Paul (Gal. 1:1; Titus 1:1) and Barnabas (Acts 14:14) were also considered Apostles. Paul and Barnabas also became Bishops “looking after” the Christian community: Acts 15:36. There we are told that both went to "visit [episkepsometha = look after, oversee] our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, [and see] how they do.” See Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible One Volume Carrying Edition, p. 839.] Here Barnabas is counted as a Bishop in the same sense that Paul is.

Thus, Apostles became bishops and they selected successors. In Acts 1:20 it is important to note the particular word used by the biblical author to designate the succession of Matthias into the office of Bishop. He uses the word episkopee which specifies the office rather than the person. That is why most translations speak of an ‘office’ rather than a more personal ‘apostleship.’ The passages quote in there from the Old Testament's Psalm 69:25 and 109:8:

P. 69:25 Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents.

P. 109:8 Let his days be few; and let another take his office [Gr. Episkopee]

These Psalms speak clearly of an office and a principle of succession. In context, the psalmist is speaking of his many enemies that he wishes God would banish and replace with others more faithful and qualified. And here is where Peter goes to bring forth the principle for Acts 1:21 and the succession of Judas. See how office is in view and not a personal privilege to Mathias.

Let’s continue. The word episkopee is used 4 times in the NT. In two instances it refers to a ‘visitation’ (Luke 19:44 and 1 Peter 2:21) but in the other two, the word refers to an ecclesiastical office (Acts 1:20; 1 Tim. 3:1). The word episkopos (used to designate the person rather than the office) is not used in Acts but instead episkopee (office) is used. The establishment of the office is in view not the privilege of a person being counted as an Apostle. How we know this succession is carried out to bishops?

In the only other reference to episkopee in the New Testament [1 Timothy 3:1] Paul states that ‘anyone desiring the office (episkopee) desires a good work.’ Since in the next verse he uses the word episkopos to specify the person of the bishop we know that the instance of episkopee refers to the office occupied by the person.

Both the bishop and his office are mentioned successibly; demonstrating they are interconnected yet distinct. Thus, to the office of Apostle in Acts 1:20 Paul adds the office of bishop in 1 Tim. 3:1, both specified by the only usage of the same word episkopee in reference to ecclesiastical office in the NT. The offices once occupied by the Apostles are now occupied by the Bishops. They rule the Church in an office which is hierarchical and dynastic and successive.

From this we can conclude that:

episkopee refers to the office in view not the person of the bishop or apostle and that the office is created for the Church;

it is in Church structure as an office beyond just the 12 Apostles;

The office in itself is in view (which Peter interprets to be an office from Psalms 69:25 and 109:8)

These Psalms, again, refer not to Judas as a person but to the office. Therefore, since episkopee is used in reference to the office of bishop in 1 Tim. 3:1 the same principle of succession of that office must hold since that is the way Peter first interpreted and used the word. A bishop who dies must have the office of bishop filled. Whatever title in view (apostle; bishop) is clearly delineated under the idea of succession to an office; following Peter’s interpretation of the Psalms.

This biblical practice is consistent with what the Early Church Fathers wrote to us and confirmed by eminent Protestant theologians:

The Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes, "[W]here in practice was [the] apostolic testimony or tradition to be found? . . . The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation. . . . Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for it" (Early Christian Doctrines, 37).

Clement

"Through countryside and city [the apostles] preached, and they appointed their earliest converts, testing them by the Spirit, to be the bishops and deacons of future believers. Nor was this a novelty, for bishops and deacons had been written about a long time earlier. . . . Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry" (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3 [A.D. 80]).

[This is extremely early and even then calls it “not a novelty”. Apostolic succession was clearly in the mind of the early Fathers and was being experienced by the Church].

Hegesippus

"When I had come to Rome, I [visited] Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus. And after Anicetus [died], Soter succeeded, and after him Eleutherus. In each succession and in each city there is a continuance of that which is proclaimed by the law, the prophets, and the Lord"(Memoirs, cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4:22 [A.D. 180]).

[Here, a hierarchy is in view clearly as Anicetus was an Episkopos and Eleutherus was a diakonoi under him.]

Irenaeus

"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known to us throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to our own times, men who neither knew nor taught anything like what these heretics rave about" (Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 189]).

To us Catholics, the testimony of the Early Church is binding and crucial. It demonstrates a continuity with what we learn in Scripture and confirms to us that Jesus established it as the formal mean to convey all He is to the faithful.

To be continued...

Continued:

I. The Church Understood as Communion

The concept of communion, koinonia, is very suitable to express the core of the mystery of the Church. Some understandings of the Church suffer from approaches that inadequately present the Church as a mystery of communion insofar as they do not integrate the views of People of God and Body of Christ. They also miss the relationship between the Church as communion and the Church as sacrament.

Communion lies at the heart of the Church's self-understanding insofar as it expresses the mystery of the personal union of each human beiing with the Triune God. If we are going to understand this communion we must do it in reference to the Biblical and patristic tradition where such communion always involves a double reality: Communion with God and Communion with one another.

It is crucial to see that this communion in its double dimension is a gift from God initiated by Him and carried out through the mystery of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. This new reality of communion with God s established by Christ and communicated through the sacraments and makes Christians members of the same body, the Mystical Body of Christ, and of an organically structured community.

So, this unity is both spiritual and visible if it is true communion. As invisible, it is the communion of each human being with the Father through Christ in the Holy Spirit. On earth, there is an intimate relationship between the invisible communion and the visible in the teaching of the apostles, the sacraments, and the hierarchical order. This unity constitutes the Church as a sacrament, the Sacrament of Salvation. Mystery and Sacrament are united in the communion of the Church.

Thus, the hierarchical structure of the Church is not peripheral or accidental to what the mystery of Church is. This Ecclesial Communion into which we are introduced through faith and baptism has its center in the Eucharist. Baptism incorporates us into a Body animated by the Spirit of God and nourished by the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, so that the Body becomes truly the body of Christ.

So, the Eucharist is the creative force and source of communion as it is Christ Himself. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 10:17: "Because the Bread is One, we though many, are one body, all of us who partake of the one bread."

The Church is a communion of saints. Why? First because we share Holy Things, the goods of salvation in the Sacraments. The Eucharist again, is of special importance as He present there is our life, our strength. Thus, we are saints first because we are called to holiness, not because we are perfect and because we share the means of holiness the Lord gave as gifts to aid us: the sacraments.

This sharing brings forth spiritual solidarity among the members of Christ journeying together and sharing on Holy Things. To this reality of unity among us on earth we give the name of the Church in pilgrimage. This bond unites us in prayer through the Holy Spirit who fills and unites the whole church. Thus, communal prayer and communal celebration, the Liturgy, is nether optional or accidental to the concept of Church.

In its reality as mystery of communion, this unity and solidarity among the members of the Body exists not only among those of us journeying in time but also with our brethren who having passed from thiis world in friendship with God belong to the heavenly Church or will become members of the heavenly host after being purified. Thus, this unity among all of those who are in Christ, here on earth, on their way to heaven or now enjoying the Beatific Vision of God is the Mystery of Communion.

This Church, although so diverse as we see, is One. Among the varied expressions of this One Church we find, from the beginning, entities we call churches. They are particular in the sense that they make present the Universal Church in the local community. They are constituted "after the model of the Universal Church" [Council Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 23] and each constitutes a portion of the People of God entrusted to the bishop of that locality.

The Church thus is a Communion of Churches. However, each particular church is not a complete subject in itself. This can be called ecclesiastical unilateralism and impoverishes the truth of the Church as communion. In every local congregation the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is truly present and active. That is why, fo example, each local church is not an entity closed to itself with independent power to change the Liturgy, change teaching, etc. No, we are all One body sharing in Holy Things and a Holy People, united in one body.

The Universal Church is not "the sum" or "federation" of churches but an essential mystery, an ontological and prior reality to the churches. That is why the Fathers said the Church as mystery precedes creation [See St. Clement of Rome Epist. II, Ad Corinthians , 4:2; Shepherd of Hermas, Vis., 2:4]. The Church gives birth to the Churches in the Upper Room, so the churches are daughters not mothers of the Church. At Pentecost, the 120 who gathered around Mary, the 12 apostles and Peter presiding the Church was born and from that moment, the Church speaks all languages.

"At Pentecost...all nations...had become a marvelous choir to intone a hymn of praise to God in perfect harmony, because the Holy Spirit had brought distances to nought, eliminated discordant notes and transformed the varieties of the peoples into the first-fruits to be offered to the Father." [St. Ireneus, Adversus Haereses III, 17,2].

Every member of the faithful, through baptism, is inserted into the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and does not belong to the Church in a mediated fashion, by joining a particular church. No, when we are baptized at a local church we are inserted into the Mystery of Christ in the Mystery of Communion we call The Church.

So, by belonging to a local church I am not a stranger to the other churches but a son, a brother, a member of all the churches. II can go to China, find an underground Catholic church and I am not a visitor, I am at home. Each member of the faithful is in his Church regardless of whether or not he belongs, according to canon law, to that particular diocese, parish, or community.

Unity into the mystery of communion is rooted in the same baptism, the same faith professed by all, the same sacraments, especially the Eucharist, and the same ecclesiastical leadership or episcopate. The celebration of the Liturgy is never that local community's celebration alone but that celebration is one across the churches and in the Heavenly Host. Only one Church, here on earth, dispersed throughout the world and united with the brethren in heaven is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The Church does not arise from the base. The oneness and indivisibility of the Eucharist shows the unity of all the churches. For this reason, the Petrine Ministry of Service is also present to all the churches in the communion of the local bishop with his co-worker in Rome. As all churches are united by one and the same faith, sacraments and one indivisible Bread, there is also a oneness in the Episcopate. The unity of the Episcopate calls for a Church that is head, foremost in charity, the bishop of Rome." [See Lumen Gentium, 22; St. Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae, 4]. The Roman Pontiff, as the successor of Peter, is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity of the Episcopate.

To be Continued...

 

[RANDOR]

Dang...that's a lot to read....just tell me in lamen terms

 

[Martin W.]

We have heard it all before Mr Catholic , it appears you are trying to pacify your own insecurities about what you have been indoctrinated by your "church"

Many Catholics are like that .... but if you try to have a discussion with them about Christ or salvation .... all you get is blank stares.

Many even think Jesus is something they eat at Mass.

 

[shturt678]

The following is a thread started by a friend of mine, and re-posted with his permission:

Continued:

Thank you for caring!

Loooonng ago someone told me that the RCC has a different "faith" then us Protestants, viz., fides caritate formata? I was just wondering how much truth there is to this?

Old Protestant Jack

 

[RANDOR]

Thank you for caring!

Loooonng ago someone told me that the RCC has a different "faith" then us Protestants, viz., fides caritate formata? I was just wondering how much truth there is to this?

Old Protestant Jack

Wonder no more Jack..............................for it is all the chasing of the wind..............

 

[shturt678]

Wonder no more Jack..............................for it is all the chasing of the wind..............

I was just wondering if he who wonders that those in itself is wonder, or something like that?

You got it!

Old Jack

 

[aspen]

hey MARTIN,

try me

 

[brakelite]

We are fully aware that Rome claims to be the sole authority for spiritual matters on earth. No-one, according to many Catholic writers, will ever enter heaven without the express approval or permission of the Roman bishop. However, what Protestants forget is that for centuries a succesion of Catholic popes have sought political or secular power. Several Bulls have been promulgated to this end, notably Dictatus Papae prepared by Pope Gregory 7th in the 11th century, and Unum Sanctum prepared by or at least on behalf of Pope Boniface 8th in the 13th century. Later popes reafirmed the general thoughts of these former bulls, and modern moves within the Vatican have only confirmed this further. I strongly recommend reading a book written by the late Malachi Martin, a Jesuit insider to the Vatican , the book entitled "The Keys of this Blood".

The following is a good preface to the book by wiki....

Martin wrote this book as a geopolitical and georeligious analysis of the last decades of the 20th century. He identifies this period as the millennium end-game for a new world order, which has three main contenders. It will establish the first ever one-world government. Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev, and international business leaders are in competition to establish this one world government and that this competition will intensify around the turn of the 20th century. The book further claims to be an inside account of what the pope is doing to win this geopolitical struggle and how he played an instrumental role in the collapse of the Iron Curtain.
Martin identifies the three main players vying for world domination in the world today and thus lays the ground for his historical analysis: materialism with the East and West in their communism or socialism and capitalism or liberalism, which he places on one side together, and the Roman Catholic Church, the only truly geopolitical spiritual organization in existence today. One of the two sides must win, for they cannot coexist.
Martin introduces the concept of superforce in the book. Superforce is the unofficial name given by Martin for a more or less formal group of people within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church (82). Martin claimed that this superforce is a sort of ecclesiastical version of a hostile corporate takeover team and that it was made up of churchmen of such rank and power within the Vatican and at key points of the hierarchic structure that they controlled the most vital organs and sinews of that structure, worldwide. The goal of this organisation consist in a fundamental shift in church teachings.

Today Francis is making unprecedented moves in this direction. It isn't only religious unity he is seeking, but he is clearly setting himself as power broker in international politics. Protestantism has also forgotten that political and religious freedom was built on the foundations laid by her forbears, and paid for by their blood. Blood spilt by Rome. In 1965, the Vatican 2 council made a declaration of religious freedom. More recently, Pope John Paul said several times that he was a promoter of religious freedom, apologising for the church's "judgemental attitude in the past", putting it down to "a different age and time". I suggest, rather I state categorically, that the only difference between the practices of the modern Roman church and that one of the dark ages lies in their ability to get away with it.

The following is a quote from a writer unfortunately the name of whom I have lost record of. However, I do believe that what he writes puts the current situation in great perspective, particularly in consideration of the fact that nearly every political leader in the world is today lining up at the front door of the Vatican seeking a meeting with Francis, as well as leading charismatic/pentecostal Protestant and Orthodox pastors and bishops. This pope even more than his predeccessors,is galvinising not just ecumenism, but the political NWO. The formation of Babylon is taking place before your very eyes, and I poitely and respectfully suggest that you all wake up before it is too late.

Quote:
" Today we have become so accustomed to freedom that we are prone to take it for granted- as if, because it is 'unalienable' we could never be deprived of it, or lose it even by default on our part. Our best protection against this false sense of security is to recall and keep untarnished in memory the long and arduous struggle over a period of centuries, in both Europe and theNew World, as a result of which full civil and religious freedom became a reality, and to be aware (and to beware) of the vested interests that live with us today, more or less in hiding to be sure, reminds us that they could very well in circumstances they find favourable, reassert themselves....
So long as the desire to control other people or to take advantage of them for selfish reasons infests a few minds anywhere, the virus of tyranny remains endemic and could become epidemic....
The ideal of seperation of church and state, with a free church in a free state, is one that deserves to be kept in sharp focus, and tender loving care..."

Prior to the Vatican 2 declaration on religious freedom in 1965, (note only 50 years ago!!) papal theory and practice had always, without exception, been adamantly opposed to civil and religious liberty, democracy, and the seperation of church and state. The papal syllabus of errors of 1864 explicitly condemned all these principles, together with the idea that anyone had the right to worship according to his conscience instead of as the church might direct.

It is thought by many that the declaration on religious freedom of Vatican 2 was a de-facto reflection to the modern world rather than a basic revision of the historical position of the church. It is certain that the members of the Roman curia at the vatican have not, like the American bishops, become ardent advocates of religious freedom. Dogmatically and idealogically, its claim to exclusive possession of the keys to heaven, to the authority of the church over the state, and to favoured status and government support, has not changed.

You welcome Rome at your peril.

 

[shturt678]

Thank you brakelite and Martin

I was just wondering about the bottom line in all this which I pretty much agree with although I'm less than the least, paygrade wise for sure.

Now if I could control the 'economics' of all the nations behind the scenes, then I wonder if this would amount to absolute authority absolutely over not only nations but all of them? I could even start a war controlling both nations, knowing the outcome of each, filling up my bankster's account. I know! Talking too much. My point is I wonder how many of the banksters are RCC, or even maybe controls the Banksters of the world?

Old Jack adjusting his sails trying to reach his destination.

 

[brakelite]

We have heard it all before Mr Catholic , it appears you are trying to pacify your own insecurities about what you have been indoctrinated by your "church"

Many Catholics are like that .... but if you try to have a discussion with them about Christ or salvation .... all you get is blank stares.

Many even think Jesus is something they eat at Mass.

Reminds me Martin, when I first became a Christian after being raised Catholic, having never read a Bible followed my first instinct and went to mass for the first time in several years. Upon leaving church the priest was waiting at the door to greet his parishioners and it came to my turn to shake the man's hand. I introduced myself with a big smile , I mean I was buzzing after having met Jesus the night before (this was in a city I had never been to church in before of any faith so this guy didn't know me, and he was only the second person I professed my new faith to). I said to him "I became a Christian and received Jesus into my life last night" ......talk about blank stare....I would have got more of a reaction talking to the parking meter by my car. I went back the next week at a different time in case that was an aberration....thgis time I couldn't even go through with the whole service....I've never been back since;that was in 1976.

Thank you brakelite and Martin

I was just wondering about the bottom line in all this which I pretty much agree with although I'm less than the least, paygrade wise for sure.

Now if I could control the 'economics' of all the nations behind the scenes, then I wonder if this would amount to absolute authority absolutely over not only nations but all of them? I could even start a war controlling both nations, knowing the outcome of each, filling up my bankster's account. I know! Talking too much. My point is I wonder how many of the banksters are RCC, or even maybe controls the Banksters of the world?

Old Jack adjusting his sails trying to reach his destination.

Jack, you could be opening a very large ugly can of worms with that one my friend. The individual bankers of many large and influential banks all around the world you will find are actually Jewish. But they all belong to secret societies. The Illuminati and its offshoots. On the other hand you have the Jesuits. Now these guys are the real deal when it comes to espionage and poilitcal power plays. They were specifically formed as a power within the church to support, promote, and establish Catholic authority in both the secular and religious world. For 400 years they have been working diligently behind the scenes and they stop at nothing in order to achieve their goals. To them the end fully justifies the means. They assasinate, murder, slander, lie, cheat, steal, anything to accomplish their designed result. The Jesuits have infiltrated every secret society, every Protestant seminary, Bible College, Bible Society, Governemt agencies and NGOs all around the world. There is barely a nation on the planet that hasn't, at one time or another, banned the Jesuits from their shores. Even the RCC itself banned them at one stage, until that particular pope died mysteriously...the next pope reinstated them.

And now for the first time a Jesuit is pope. This is not a coincidence. There are several online books that tell a little of their story. I recommend them. You will be surprised.

 

[shturt678]

Reminds me Martin, when I first became a Christian after being raised Catholic, having never read a Bible followed my first instinct and went to mass for the first time in several years. Upon leaving church the priest was waiting at the door to greet his parishioners and it came to my turn to shake the man's hand. I introduced myself with a big smile , I mean I was buzzing after having met Jesus the night before (this was in a city I had never been to church in before of any faith so this guy didn't know me, and he was only the second person I professed my new faith to). I said to him "I became a Christian and received Jesus into my life last night" ......talk about blank stare....I would have got more of a reaction talking to the parking meter by my car. I went back the next week at a different time in case that was an aberration....thgis time I couldn't even go through with the whole service....I've never been back since;that was in 1976.

Jack, you could be opening a very large ugly can of worms with that one my friend. The individual bankers of many large and influential banks all around the world you will find are actually Jewish. But they all belong to secret societies. The Illuminati and its offshoots. On the other hand you have the Jesuits. Now these guys are the real deal when it comes to espionage and poilitcal power plays. They were specifically formed as a power within the church to support, promote, and establish Catholic authority in both the secular and religious world. For 400 years they have been working diligently behind the scenes and they stop at nothing in order to achieve their goals. To them the end fully justifies the means. They assasinate, murder, slander, lie, cheat, steal, anything to accomplish their designed result. The Jesuits have infiltrated every secret society, every Protestant seminary, Bible College, Bible Society, Governemt agencies and NGOs all around the world. There is barely a nation on the planet that hasn't, at one time or another, banned the Jesuits from their shores. Even the RCC itself banned them at one stage, until that particular pope died mysteriously...the next pope reinstated them.

And now for the first time a Jesuit is pope. This is not a coincidence. There are several online books that tell a little of their story. I recommend them. You will be surprised.

Thank you for your response again!

Wow! Your more gutsy than me! Don't worry, our Lord Jesus standing right beside you!

That was well put forth, to say the least!!!

Old Jack,

btw did my thesis and dissertation on this decades ago, ie, because of it was reduced in paygrade having to start all over again. Again, good job - you know more than me for sure!

 

[aspen]

funny......you guys love to trash jesuits, all accept malachi martin. he was a jesuit his whole life ......... but i guess the enemies of my enemies are my friends even when happen to be jesuits....

 

[Martin W.]

funny......you guys love to trash jesuits, all accept malachi martin. he was a jesuit his whole life ......... but i guess the enemies of my enemies are my friends even when happen to be jesuits....

The late Malachi Martin was a good one , I own , and have read all his books , and have spoken to him when he was alive , he is a very honest man , He renounced some of his catholic vows (remained a priest) in order to write his books , many of which were critical of the catholic church.

Some Catholics are Christians and he was one of them.

 

[zeke25]

Revelation 17:4
And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication[.]

 

[brakelite]

Alberto Rivera was an interesting character. Claiming to be an ex-Jesuit, he spoke vehemntly against Catholicism, blaming the Jesuits for assasinations, and all sorts of nefarious deeds, but including a number of silly claims easily disproved, for example the Jesuits being behind the inquisition of the 1300s when the Jesuits weren't in existence until the 16th century. He was also of a rather dubious character,being suspected of fraud and bouncing cheques etc. His claims to the priesthood were denied by the Vatican, and his doctorates were counterfeits. Yet many of his charges against the Jesuits were in fact true. Makes one think of the general populations attitude today when someone like myself brings up these subjects ...the reult is often disbelief and cries of ridicule because of Rivera's false claims. The baby is thrown out with the bathwater. So while he may not have been a Jesuit, (as far as we know) could he have been a Jesuit plant instill doubt re any future charges? They think long term...this is just the type of mind-games they are famous for.

A great book to read is "50 Years in the Church of Rome" by Charles Chiniquay. He was a close friend of Abraham Lincoln, who when a lawyer defended Chiniquay against criminal charges being brought by the RCC against Chiniquay. Lincoln got him aquitted, but Chiniquay warned Lincoln that the Jesuits in the church would seek revenge. http://arcticbeacon.com/books/Chiniquy-Fifty_Years_in_the_Church_of_Rome-1886-NOT-Bkmrkd.pdf
Another book is http://arcticbeacon.com/books/Paris-The_Secret_History_of_Jesuits%281975%29.pdf

Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction
​

The following is the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction given to high ranking Jesuits only. This oath is taken from the book Subterranean Rome by Carlos Didier, translated from the French, and published in New York in 1843.
"When a Jesuit of the minor rank is to be elevated to command, he is conducted into the Chapel of the Convent of the Order, where there are only three others present, the principal or Superior standing in front of the altar. On either side stands a monk, one of whom holds a banner of yellow and white, which are the Papal colors, and the other a black banner with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, with the word INRI, and below them the words IUSTUM, NECAR, REGES, IMPIOUS. The meaning of which is: It is just to exterminate or annihilate impious or heretical Kings, Governments, or Rulers. Upon the floor is a red cross at which the postulant or candidate kneels. The Superior hands him a small black crucifix, which he takes in his left hand and presses to his heart, and the Superior at the same time presents to him a dagger, which he grasps by the blade and holds the point against his heart, the Superior still holding it by the hilt, and thus addresses the postulant:"
Superior:
My son, heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant, and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope.
You have been taught to insidiously plant the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces, states that were at peace, and incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and the sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace. To take sides with the combatants and to act secretly with your brother Jesuit, who might be engaged on the other side, but openly opposed to that with which you might be connected, only that the Church might be the gainer in the end, in the conditions fixed in the treaties for peace and that the end justifies the means.
You have been taught your duty as a spy, to gather all statistics, facts and information in your power from every source; to ingratiate yourself into the confidence of the family circle of Protestants and heretics of every class and character, as well as that of the merchant, the banker, the lawyer, among the schools and universities, in parliaments and legislatures, and the judiciaries and councils of state, and to be all things to all men, for the Pope's sake, whose servants we are unto death.
You have received all your instructions heretofore as a novice, a neophyte, and have served as co-adjurer, confessor and priest, but you have not yet been invested with all that is necessary to command in the Army of Loyola in the service of the Pope. You must serve the proper time as the instrument and executioner as directed by your superiors; for none can command here who has not consecrated his labors with the blood of the heretic; for "without the shedding of blood no man can be saved." Therefore, to fit yourself for your work and make your own salvation sure, you will, in addition to your former oath of obedience to your order and allegiance to the Pope, repeat after me---
The Extreme Oath of the Jesuits:
"1, _ now, in the presence of Almighty God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed Michael the Archangel, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the holy Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul and all the saints and sacred hosts of heaven, and to you, my ghostly father, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius Loyola in the Pontificate of Paul the Third, and continued to the present, do by the womb of the virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear, that his holiness the Pope is Christ's Vice-regent and is the true and only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by virtue of the keys of binding and loosing, given to his Holiness by my Savior, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, states, commonwealths and governments, all being illegal without his sacred confirmation and that they may safely be destroyed. Therefore, to the utmost of my power I shall and will defend this doctrine of his Holiness' right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran of Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the now pretended authority and churches of England and Scotland, and branches of the same now established in Ireland and on the Continent of America and elsewhere; and all adherents in regard that they be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome. I do now renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or state named Protestants or Liberals, or obedience to any of the laws, magistrates or officers.
I do further declare that the doctrine of the churches of England and Scotland, of the Calvinists, Huguenots and others of the name Protestants or Liberals to be damnable and they themselves damned who will not forsake the same.
I do further declare, that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of his Holiness' agents in any place wherever I shall be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, England, Ireland or America, or in any other Kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my uttermost to extirpate the heretical Protestants or Liberals' doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, regal or otherwise.
I do further promise and declare, that notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to assume my religion heretical, for the propaganda of the Mother Church's interest, to keep secret and private all her agents' counsels from time to time, as they may entrust me and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstance whatever; but to execute all that shall be proposed, given in charge or discovered unto me, by you, my ghostly father, or any of this sacred covenant.
I do further promise and declare, that I will have no opinion or will of my own, or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the Militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ.
That I may go to any part of the world withersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions of the North, the burning sands of the desert of Africa, or the jungles of India, to the centers of civilization of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America, without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things whatsoever communicated to me.
I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poniard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus.
In confirmation of which, I hereby dedicate my life, my soul and all my corporal powers, and with this dagger which I now receive, I will subscribe my name written in my own blood, in testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the Militia of the Pope cut off my hands and my feet, and my throat from ear to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein, with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth and my soul be tortured by demons in an eternal hell forever!
All of which, I, _, do swear by the Blessed Trinity and blessed Sacraments, which I am now to receive, to perform and on my part to keep inviolable; and do call all the heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist, and witness the same further with my name written and with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and sealed in the face of this holy covenant."
(He receives the wafer from the Superior and writes his name with the point of his dagger dipped in his own blood taken from over his heart.)
Superior:
"You will now rise to your feet and I will instruct you in the Catechism necessary to make yourself known to any member of the Society of Jesus belonging to this rank.
In the first place, you, as a Brother Jesuit, will with another mutually make the ordinary sign of the cross as any ordinary Roman Catholic would; then one cross his wrists, the palms of his hands open, and the other in answer crosses his feet, one above the other; the first points with forefinger of the right hand to the center of the palm of the left, the other with the forefinger of the left hand points to the center of the palm of the right; the first then with his right hand makes a circle around his head, touching it; the other then with the forefinger of his left hand touches the left side of his body just below his heart; the first then with his right hand draws it across the throat of the other, and the latter then with a dagger down the stomach and abdomen of the first. The first then says Iustum; and the other answers Necar; the first Reges. The other answers Impious." (The meaning of which has already been explained.) "The first will then present a small piece of paper folded in a peculiar manner, four times, which the other will cut longitudinally and on opening the name Jesu will be found written upon the head and arms of a cross three times. You will then give and receive with him the following questions and answers:
Question —From whither do you come? Answer — The Holy faith.
Q. —Whom do you serve?
A. —The Holy Father at Rome, the Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church Universal throughout the world.
Q. —Who commands you?
A. —The Successor of St. Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus or the Soldiers of Jesus Christ.
Q. —Who received you? A. —A venerable man in white hair.
Q. —How?
A. —With a naked dagger, I kneeling upon the cross beneath the banners of the Pope and of our sacred order.
Q. —Did you take an oath?
A. —I did, to destroy heretics and their governments and rulers, and to spare neither age, sex nor condition. To be as a corpse without any opinion or will of my own, but to implicitly obey my Superiors in all things without hesitation of murmuring.
Q. —Will you do that? A. —I will.
Q. —How do you travel? A. —In the bark of Peter the fisherman.
Q. —Whither do you travel? A. —To the four quarters of the globe. Q. —For what purpose?
A. —To obey the orders of my general and Superiors and execute the will of the Pope and faithfully fulfill the conditions of my oaths.
Q. —Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Vice-regent on earth, let him be accursed and exterminated."

The Jesuit Oath of Induction is also recorded in the Congressional Record of the U.S. (House Bill 1523, Contested election case of Eugene C. Bonniwell, against Thos. S. Butler, Feb. 15, 1913, pp. 3215-3216).

 

[shturt678]

funny......you guys love to trash jesuits, all accept malachi martin. he was a jesuit his whole life ......... but i guess the enemies of my enemies are my friends even when happen to be jesuits....

Thank you for caring!

Are you aware that there are two types of Jesuits? One type the good guys, the other needs to be trashed.

Old Jack

The late Malachi Martin was a good one , I own , and have read all his books , and have spoken to him when he was alive , he is a very honest man , He renounced some of his catholic vows (remained a priest) in order to write his books , many of which were critical of the catholic church.

Some Catholics are Christians and he was one of them.

See, here's a good example of one of the "good guys."

Amen!

Old Jack

Taking the emergency brake off on this one brakelite - Perfect!

Been decades, but memory coming back.

Old Jack