“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.