B
brakelite
Guest
The Aggressive Intentions of the Papacy
Summary: The historian Ranke says thisabout Protestant-Catholic relations: "In the year 1617, everything betokened a decisive conflict between them. The Catholic party appears to have felt itself the superior. At all events it was the first to take up arms."
Many Americans would be surprised to learn that one of the greatest opponents of civil and religious liberty is the Roman Catholic Church.
No one knows about the Roman Catholic hatred of liberty because history textbooks in public schools and colleges have been, for the most part, purged of nearly all things negative about papal Rome’s bloody history. Many Jesuits and other supporters of Catholicism have allegedly joined textbook selection committees in order to censor negative comments about the Roman Catholic Church. Encyclopedias in the USA have also been affected. History has been rewritten so that less and less people know about the true issues that faced the reformers and the true history of the Catholic Church.
Darryl Eberhart of Tackling the Tough Topics newsletter writes this:
Most of our encyclopedias and history textbooks do NOT tell us that the purposeof the attempted invasion of England in 1588 by the Spanish Armada was to land troops in England to be joined by local Roman Catholics in an effort to overthrow the government and bring England, by force, back under the authority of Papal Rome! The Roman Catholic King of Spain (Philip II) wanted financial “compensation” for launching this invasion. And so the Roman pontiff, Pope Sixtus V, promised King Philip II 200,000 crowns as soon as the Spanish Armada had set sail for England, and more cash to follow later. Thus the Papacy was helping to fund the planned invasion of England.
In 1931, Pope Pius XI explained this initiative in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno:
Under the guidance and in light of Leo’s encyclical was thus evolved a truly Christian social science, which continues to be fostered and enriched daily by the tireless labours of those picked menwhom we have named the auxiliaries of the Church...The doctrine of Rerum Novarum began little by little to penetrate among those who, being outside Catholic unity, do not recognize the authority of the Church; and these Catholic principles of sociology gradually became part of the intellectual heritage of the whole human race...Thus too, we rejoice that the Catholic truths proclaimed so vigorously by our illustrious Predecessor [Leo XIII in 1891’s Rerum Novarum], are advanced and advocated not merely in non-Catholic books and journals, but frequently also in legislative assemblies and in courts of justice” (emphasis added).ii
Here are several quotes highlighting the Papacy's aggressive intentions:
Catholic Professor Orestes Brownson, Brownson’s Review (January, 1854): 90:
But is it the intention of the pope to possess this country? Undoubtedly. In this intention is he aided by the Jesuits and all the Catholic prelates and priests? Undoubtedly, if they are faithful to their religion.iii
Hector MacPherson, The Jesuits in History(Edinburgh: Macniven and Wallace, 1914): 52, 85, 100:
...that the Jesuits were actively plotting for the extermination of Protestantism was no fiction of Oates, but a most certain and deadly fact...
At the Reformation the Irish race remained Romanist; and the miseries which came upon it must be in the main traced to the Jesuits, who used Ireland as a factor in their scheme of overthrowing the Protestantism of England and establishing a Roman Catholic dynasty completely under the control of the Papacy.
...wherever the Jesuits went, they placed the worldly prosperity and the political influence of their Order above all religious considerations. In accordance with their secret policy they set themselves to gain influence at Court; and, in order to carry their point, they were willing to countenance assassination, sedition, etc.
Pope John Paul II, in his apostolic letter Ad Tuendam Fidem (May 18, 1998), made bold statements about the need for submission to the Pope on doctrinal issues. He declared that lack of submission was worthy of punishment:
Whoever denies or places in doubt any truth that must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or repudiates the Christian faith as a whole, and does not come to his senses after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished as a heretic...whoever obstinately rejects a teaching that the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising the authentic Magisterium, have set forth to be held definitively, or who affirms what they have condemned as erroneous, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished with an appropriate penalty.
One of the doctrinal issues the Papacy demands submission on is the keeping of Sunday. Pope John Paul II said this, in agreement with Ad Tuendam Fidem:
A person who violates the sanctity of Sunday is to be punished as a heretic.iv
Pope Nicholas I in a letter to the King of Bulgaria in 860 AD:
I glorify you for having maintained your authority by putting to death those wandering sheep who refused to enter the fold; and you not only have not sinned, by showing a holy rigour, but I even congratulate you on having opened the kingdom of heaven to the people submitted to your rule. A king need not fear to command massacres, when these will retain his subjects in obedience, or cause them to submit to the faith of Christ; and God will reward him in this world, and in eternal life, for these murders.
Pope Urban II's address in Clermont, France in November 1095:
If you must have blood, bathe in the blood of infidels. Soldiers of hell, become soldiers of the living God!
Pope Leo VIII, Immortale Dei (November 1, 1885):
The unrestrained freedom of thinking and of openly making known one’s thoughts is not inherent in the rights of citizens and is by no means worthy of favor and support (emphasis added).
Summary: The historian Ranke says thisabout Protestant-Catholic relations: "In the year 1617, everything betokened a decisive conflict between them. The Catholic party appears to have felt itself the superior. At all events it was the first to take up arms."
Many Americans would be surprised to learn that one of the greatest opponents of civil and religious liberty is the Roman Catholic Church.
No one knows about the Roman Catholic hatred of liberty because history textbooks in public schools and colleges have been, for the most part, purged of nearly all things negative about papal Rome’s bloody history. Many Jesuits and other supporters of Catholicism have allegedly joined textbook selection committees in order to censor negative comments about the Roman Catholic Church. Encyclopedias in the USA have also been affected. History has been rewritten so that less and less people know about the true issues that faced the reformers and the true history of the Catholic Church.
Darryl Eberhart of Tackling the Tough Topics newsletter writes this:
Most of our encyclopedias and history textbooks do NOT tell us that the purposeof the attempted invasion of England in 1588 by the Spanish Armada was to land troops in England to be joined by local Roman Catholics in an effort to overthrow the government and bring England, by force, back under the authority of Papal Rome! The Roman Catholic King of Spain (Philip II) wanted financial “compensation” for launching this invasion. And so the Roman pontiff, Pope Sixtus V, promised King Philip II 200,000 crowns as soon as the Spanish Armada had set sail for England, and more cash to follow later. Thus the Papacy was helping to fund the planned invasion of England.
In 1931, Pope Pius XI explained this initiative in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno:
Under the guidance and in light of Leo’s encyclical was thus evolved a truly Christian social science, which continues to be fostered and enriched daily by the tireless labours of those picked menwhom we have named the auxiliaries of the Church...The doctrine of Rerum Novarum began little by little to penetrate among those who, being outside Catholic unity, do not recognize the authority of the Church; and these Catholic principles of sociology gradually became part of the intellectual heritage of the whole human race...Thus too, we rejoice that the Catholic truths proclaimed so vigorously by our illustrious Predecessor [Leo XIII in 1891’s Rerum Novarum], are advanced and advocated not merely in non-Catholic books and journals, but frequently also in legislative assemblies and in courts of justice” (emphasis added).ii
Here are several quotes highlighting the Papacy's aggressive intentions:
Catholic Professor Orestes Brownson, Brownson’s Review (January, 1854): 90:
But is it the intention of the pope to possess this country? Undoubtedly. In this intention is he aided by the Jesuits and all the Catholic prelates and priests? Undoubtedly, if they are faithful to their religion.iii
Hector MacPherson, The Jesuits in History(Edinburgh: Macniven and Wallace, 1914): 52, 85, 100:
...that the Jesuits were actively plotting for the extermination of Protestantism was no fiction of Oates, but a most certain and deadly fact...
At the Reformation the Irish race remained Romanist; and the miseries which came upon it must be in the main traced to the Jesuits, who used Ireland as a factor in their scheme of overthrowing the Protestantism of England and establishing a Roman Catholic dynasty completely under the control of the Papacy.
...wherever the Jesuits went, they placed the worldly prosperity and the political influence of their Order above all religious considerations. In accordance with their secret policy they set themselves to gain influence at Court; and, in order to carry their point, they were willing to countenance assassination, sedition, etc.
Pope John Paul II, in his apostolic letter Ad Tuendam Fidem (May 18, 1998), made bold statements about the need for submission to the Pope on doctrinal issues. He declared that lack of submission was worthy of punishment:
Whoever denies or places in doubt any truth that must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or repudiates the Christian faith as a whole, and does not come to his senses after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished as a heretic...whoever obstinately rejects a teaching that the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising the authentic Magisterium, have set forth to be held definitively, or who affirms what they have condemned as erroneous, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished with an appropriate penalty.
One of the doctrinal issues the Papacy demands submission on is the keeping of Sunday. Pope John Paul II said this, in agreement with Ad Tuendam Fidem:
A person who violates the sanctity of Sunday is to be punished as a heretic.iv
Pope Nicholas I in a letter to the King of Bulgaria in 860 AD:
I glorify you for having maintained your authority by putting to death those wandering sheep who refused to enter the fold; and you not only have not sinned, by showing a holy rigour, but I even congratulate you on having opened the kingdom of heaven to the people submitted to your rule. A king need not fear to command massacres, when these will retain his subjects in obedience, or cause them to submit to the faith of Christ; and God will reward him in this world, and in eternal life, for these murders.
Pope Urban II's address in Clermont, France in November 1095:
If you must have blood, bathe in the blood of infidels. Soldiers of hell, become soldiers of the living God!
Pope Leo VIII, Immortale Dei (November 1, 1885):
The unrestrained freedom of thinking and of openly making known one’s thoughts is not inherent in the rights of citizens and is by no means worthy of favor and support (emphasis added).