Heretics

[Guest Aluigi]

.. names that Catholics should be familiar with, i might add...

the Angelic Doctor St. Thomas Aquinas
St. Augustine, 5th Century Doctor of the Church
Big Counter-Reformation Council

hey, I love John Paul II too... but Check Apotheon's VII refs, and all them saintly doctors of the Church can't be bad either. JPII is dope, but not the end-all-be-all of Catholic Doctrine.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote]Forced conversions are always wrong.[/quote] Forced conversions are not always wrong-- forced coversions are impossible. That being said sometimes heritics and infidels must be crushed militarily, sometimes they must be subjugated, and yes sometimes they must be killed to protect the faithful and society at large. To say otherwise is to challenge the Authority of Councils( which have said all these things and more) and to do that would make one a Heritic oneself. Tread carefully in this area as your understanding of the proclamations of the Magisterium seem to be lacking.


[quote]Forced conversion has driven many, many people away from the Church.[/quote]

Now since you siad this could you please justify it with some examples, as historicly "conversion by the sword" has been one ofthe most effective tools of evangilization both for Islam and Catholicism.

[noncatholicname]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Nov 14 2004, 11:03 PM'] Forced conversions are not always wrong-- forced coversions are impossible. That being said sometimes heritics and infidels must be crushed militarily, sometimes they must be subjugated, and yes sometimes they must be killed to protect the faithful and society at large. To say otherwise is to challenge the Authority of Councils( which have said all these things and more) and to do that would make one a Heritic oneself. Tread carefully in this area as your understanding of the proclamations of the Magisterium seem to be lacking.




Now since you siad this could you please justify it with some examples, as historicly "conversion by the sword" has been one ofthe most effective tools of evangilization both for Islam and Catholicism. [/quote]
That would explain Joan of Arc. Kill her, then make her a saint. You ideas are a nice theory, but in practice have proved unworkable.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote]That would explain Joan of Arc. Kill her, then make her a saint. You ideas are a nice theory, but in practice have proved unworkable. [/quote]

Wow! that was singulary incoherent, What Ideas have proved unworkable, when?

As for Joan of Arc she was killed by the English not by the Church and in express violation of Church rules on the subject. However if you would like some examples of the effectiveness of the " conversion by the sword technique well we'll stick with Catholic "conversion by the sword" whatsthe last time you can recall a sacrafice of babies to Tlaloc in Mexico, I can't think of a single mass sacrifice of babies to make it rain in Mexico oh in about 480 years-- That would include the various other sacrifices that where made which involved to slavery of millions and the sacrifice of tens of thousands of people to the Gods of the Aztecs since Cortez counquered them and tore down their Idols( which where made of a past of corn meal and human blood) simularly the Moors of Spain where comppletely assimilated into Spanish society however it took 800 years of warfare to drive the muslims out of Spain and another 30 years of fairly blatant subjugation to assimilate those that remained. Both worked extremely well.

There of course would have been no Joan of Arc to be burned if Charles Martel hadn't stoped the invading Muslims at the Battle of Poiters all of Europe would have been made Muslim. So obviously military action must sometimes be taken ( lets not even get into the Crusades you won't like it).


Now if you are speaking as to the crushing of Heretics instead of infidels not being " workable" ---whats the last time you met a Cathari well I guess the Albigensian Crusade was pretty "workable" agianst them huh.


Now practicality does not in anyway insure morality but Counciller Authority does, and Church Councils have repeatedly declared that sometimes force is need agianst Infidels and Heretics.

Edited November 15, 2004 by Don John of Austria

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Nov 15 2004, 12:52 AM']
I guess the Albigensian 0Crusade was pretty "workable" agianst them huh.


[/quote]
Aye, and a glorious crusade it was.

Trivia Question:

Can anyone tell me what separates or distinguishes a crusade from a simple justified war of conquest or defense?

Edited November 15, 2004 by popestpiusx

[Don John of Austria]

Well For starters it is Called either by the Pope or by an Ecumenical Council.

Edited November 15, 2004 by Don John of Austria

[popestpiusx]

Yes but there are other wars called by Popes that did not qualify (such as when the Papal Armies attacked Sicily during the reign of King Frederick II.

[Don John of Austria]

Well I'm not sure what you are looking for there are many things unique about Crusades, but probably the fact that Indulgances are offered to those who take up the Cross and fight in them would be the defineing factor in calling a war a Crusade, likewise it must be agianst an infidel and not just an orthodox Catholic in the wrong.

[Don John of Austria]

I anxiously await anything resembleing a response from the " oh you have have to be sweet and spinless to Heretics and Infidels" camp.

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Nov 12 2004, 07:36 PM'] The Church has always condemned coercion in matters of religion (cf. Vatican 2, [u]Dignitatis Humanae[/u], no. 12), but she has also taught, and continues to teach, that there is a moral duty on the part of civil society to recognize the true religion (cf. Vatican 2, [u]Dignitatis Humanae[/u], no. 1). Thus, the State has a moral duty to recognize the truth of the Catholic faith. Now of course the Church, as a prudential matter, does not have to insist upon the recognition of the State in a written constitution; in other words, the recognition given to the Church by the State can be purely a part of unwritten custom, nor does she have to insist upon this divine right, a right which she possesses as the mystical body of Christ. Finally, it must be borne in mind that the State has the duty to maintain the common good, and so, the right to religious exercise based on a malformed conscience is not absolute (cf. Vatican 2, [u]Dignitatis Humanae[/u], no. 7).

God bless,
Todd [/quote]
[quote]The Church has always condemned coercion in matters of religion[/quote]

You then go on to quote three times from Dignitatis Humanae. "Since Vatican II" is not "always".

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Nov 15 2004, 09:49 AM'] Well I'm not sure what you are looking for there are many things unique about Crusades, but probably the fact that Indulgances are offered to those who take up the Cross and fight in them would be the defineing factor in calling a war a Crusade, likewise it must be agianst an infidel and not just an orthodox Catholic in the wrong. [/quote]
It is still a Crusade if it's against the Eastern schismatics...

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Nov 15 2004, 09:49 AM'] Well I'm not sure what you are looking for there are many things unique about Crusades, but probably the fact that Indulgances are offered to those who take up the Cross and fight in them would be the defineing factor in calling a war a Crusade, likewise it must be agianst an infidel and not just an orthodox Catholic in the wrong. [/quote]
You are correct. The distinguishing factor is the indulgence granted by the Holy Father for those who go on crusade.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 15 2004, 01:51 PM'] It is still a Crusade if it's against the Eastern schismatics... [/quote]
The Fourth Crusade was not called to sack Constantinople. This is evidenced by the fact that Innocent III excommunicated the leadership after they disobeyed his explicit command not to do it. In fact, he even told them that he didn't want them to take the deal being offered by Alexius because Innocent knew that Alexius could never pay up. It was a bad deal all around and far from a shining moment in Crusader history. I'm not so sure the indulgence would be gained when the action itself resulted in excommunications.

[noncatholicname]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Nov 14 2004, 11:52 PM']
[/quote]
[quote]Wow! that was singulary incoherent, What Ideas have proved unworkable, when? [/quote]

Thankyou.

It's because sometimes a person's true nature only comes out in moments of self righteousness. You said to yourself, "here, I'll make more sense than you"... And proceeded to show yourself as bloodthirsty.

"Kill the infidels!"

Where have we heard that before recently? Where did they learn it?

My point concerning Joan of Arc is simple. The pharisees said Jesus was in league with the devil. The mighty Roman Catholic church, that, as you said, was mighty enough to destroy all of those idol worshipers, ending thousands of years of human sacrifice and what not, did nothing to save Joan of Arc, and later made her a saint. She was in league with the devil, after all.

That's what is unworkable.

[Don John of Austria]

The Catholic church had nothing to do with the burning of St. Joan as I said the rules of the Church where not followed, here direct appeal to the Pope was never sent.

[quote]It's because sometimes a person's true nature only comes out in moments of self righteousness. You said to yourself, "here, I'll make more sense than you"... And proceeded to show yourself as bloodthirsty.

"Kill the infidels!"

Where have we heard that before recently? Where did they learn it?

[/quote]

Wow Talk about self rightous. I assure you I am anything but self rightous, I am a weak and sinful man, but the Church is Rightous, She is the embodiment of Rightousness on Earth, and when untruths are spoken of her I am filled with indignation, yes rightous indignation. As for your veiled referance to Osama, if only more Catholics where as fully commited to their Faith as he is to his( he has after all gone from luxurious living as a multimillionare to living in caves fighting for his life every day all for what he truely believes his faith demands), still since you obviously lack a basic understanding of history, it was the Mohammedians who started the wars of religion, they attacked us( And I don't mean in 2001, but in the 7th century) so I guess they couldn't have learned " kill the infidel" from us, their religion was born with it.

And I don't recall yelling " kill the infidel" I just said sometimes killing the infidel was required, you are the one making that into a general statement on my part, I did not.

Edited November 15, 2004 by Don John of Austria