Posted on 12/20/2015 2:34:41 PM PST by marshmallow
“I don’t deny that it happened. I deny that it’s interesting.”
Meaning it is a subject to be swept under the rug.
“Lots of Protestants killed a lot of Catholics. So what?”
That’s like saying Russia killed millions too, so what about the Nazi’s.
Murderous tyrants cannot possibly be part of any continuous line of succession from the apostles. The history of the church can be traced through the lives of those who actually kept Christ’s words rather than people who wore certain clothes, owned certain land deeds, or gave themselves certain titles.
The true church of Christ owes greatly to a long list of faithful men and women, many of whom were martyred for serving Christ. Tyndale is among those. He wasn’t doing any murdering.
“And Catholic teachings and influence and power and Popes and on occasion even papal mercenaries sacrificed all to stop the very enemy who still threatens us today”
The same Catholic church tortured and burned alive at the stake men like William Tyndale. The leaders of the Catholic church of his era were not morally superior to the Muslims. And if it were not for reformers like Tyndale, modern Christendom might be as horrendous as the Islamic religion you are thankful to have been spared from.
My point in saying “So what?” was that crimes committed by anybody who may be member of some religion have NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE. The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ if it is the one Church existing today which has existed continuously since the Church we read about in the New Testament.
Actually, the Catholic Church never executed anybody. Executions were carried out by the State. In Protestant countries, the same rule generally applied. Heresy, on both sides, was a capital offense, because heresy was an attack on the social and political order.
The execution of heretics was not a peculiarly Catholic practice. It is no evidence of any peculiarly Catholic viciousness.
BTW: You are a Donatist—and Donatism is a heresy condemned, IIRC, in the Third Century.
“You are a Donatist”
Asserting things does not make them so. I am not a follower of Donatus. I do not subscribe to asceticism. I do not agree that believers should seek persecution. Nor do I accept the notion that the communion elements have validity based on the worthiness of the administering clergy. And I do not accept that only blameless believers are part of the true church. So it seems quite odd for you to dredge up some ridiculous category to label me with.
“crimes committed by anybody who may be member of some religion have NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE”
Including Islam?
“The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ if it is the one Church existing today which has existed continuously since the Church we read about in the New Testament.”
Putting a sign in front of a building claiming such does not make it so. Again, asserting it to be so does not make it so.
The true church has existed continuously from Pentecost until this day, individually, corporately, on Earth, and in Heaven. It is not made up of relics, documents, stained glass windows, fancy attire, nor in the traditions being practiced whether those traditions are biblical or unbiblical. The true church is made out of individual believers indwelled by the Holy Spirit.
Lost sinners become part of the true church when they hear the Gospel and believe through the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit.
“Heresy, on both sides, was a capital offense”
“Both” implies two. What were the two sides? Are you claiming everyone, including those in agreement with Tyndale were attempting to have their opponents put to death?
“Catholic Church never executed anybody”
But people who are recognized as part of your “continuous” entity have CAUSED true followers of Christ to be put to death, just as Paul the apostle did before his conversion. But unlike Paul, these acts have never been repented of, nor confessed. Rather they are denied or otherwise justified by people such as yourself.
“The execution of heretics was not a peculiarly Catholic practice.”
And that makes it okay? If multiple groups claiming to be the true church engage in wickedness and refuse to follow the teachings of Christ, what right do any of such groups have to claim to be part of the “continuous” church?
The Jews who murdered Christ also did so through the “State”. They also laid claim on a similar historical continuity by virtue of being “Abraham’s seed”. Christ did not deny that they were descendants of Abraham, but He pointed out that spiritually they were children of the Devil because they did works in keeping with this.
John 8:37-44a
I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.”
They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”
Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. You do the deeds of your father.”
Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him.”
Just as God promised to preserve and protect the church, God also promised to bless and protect Abraham’s seed. The religious leaders of the Jews could invoke their lineage and even trace their family tree back to Abraham. But this was insufficient for them to be included in the Abrahamic covenant. Likewise, the Roman Catholic church has lots of history, lays claim to the promises of the New Covenant, and asserts apostolic authority handed down from Peter. Yet they have not and do not do the works of Peter, nor what Christ taught, nor the apostles. They do the very same things the religious leaders who apostatized from the Abrahamic covenant had done. They also rejected the word of God to keep their traditions. They loved to wear long flowing robes and receiving the praise of men. They loved to be called “Father”. And yet they hated God’s word, Christ, and His disciples.
If Tyndale were a heretic, he would not have been able to endure the trials inflicted on him by the Catholic church and state. He followed in the steps of Christ and the apostles before him, enduring great trials for the word of God while his persecutors followed the pattern of traitors and wicked people down through the centuries. It was men like Tyndale that represent to unbroken continuity of the church— a church made up of men, women, and children who put the word of God over the vain traditions of men.
Great post wardaddy. Spot on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.