This is all too funny.
That one has been misused for so long, it has lost all it's original meaning.
I would suggest that you go find it in the [greater] context from where that one originates. It's in the footnote you supplied (but obtained form some RC apologetic page -- correct?).
It is not exactly substantiation for later Romish claims, as it can be reasonably interpreted to undo them -- as regards to singular papacy and the like.
Hence -- "squatters with mouths full of lies" still stands.
It was still murder -- much more than not. All the latter-day justifying for it engaged in by RC apologists serves chiefly to indicate those persons be sons of those fathers, similar to the Jews who Christ called out as having established that they were 'sons of' those whom had murdered the prophets.
Not all the "Waldensians" who came after Waldo were semi-pelagian, although that is a convenient accusation -- it still is not enough to justify what was done to "them" indiscriminately.
It is funny. Especially when an individual attempts to change the subject from universality to papal primacy after they've been proven incorrect in their assumption. However we can make a quick side trip to that issue:
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that wills all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God, which also presides in the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love, is named from Christ, and from the Father, which I also salute in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father: to those who are united, both according to the flesh and spirit, to every one of His commandments; who are filled inseparably with the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint, [I wish] abundance of happiness unblameably, in Jesus Christ our God. [1]
I would suggest that you go find it in the [greater] context from where that one originates. It's in the footnote you supplied (but obtained form some RC apologetic page -- correct?).
Your suggestion is noted, however your conclusion is incorrect.
It is not exactly substantiation for later Romish claims, as it can be reasonably interpreted to undo them -- as regards to singular papacy and the like.
See above.
Not all the "Waldensians" who came after Waldo were semi-pelagian, although that is a convenient accusation -- it still is not enough to justify what was done to "them" indiscriminately.
Heresy is the murder of the soul. I don't have any problem with the practice of having heretics removed from our midst. I assume you have proof to back up your assertion of what was done, "indiscriminately"?
[1] Church Fathers: Epistle to the Romans (St. Ignatius) Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. .