[HisServant]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

There is a difference between having a Church with a central authority/power, and a Church playing the role of government.

You can leave a Church, it's harder to leave a country.

Ultimately, members of a Church and Citizens of a country are responsible for their leadership...

[annabenedetti]

Lorraine Boettner's work is well-known for its innacuracies. It's well known that the numbers for the inquisition have been blown out of all logical proportion, and plays on the lack of knowledge regarding the civil government's involvement in same.

From one of the many 1-star reviews at Amazon, here's one from a non-Catholic which may prove informative:

Boettner consistently uses religious terms that mean different things to Protestants and Roman Catholics. This is the root of much of the book's misleading statements and a cause of this controversy. As Christians (you potential reader) I suggest you refrain from this book and look elsewhere. There are many better books (on both sides of the controversy!) That this one sells is largely due to the nature of the audience that reads it, an audience afraid to have its assumptions challenged and afraid to undertake the difficult labor of validating this work. Don't take this short-cut. Get James White's "The Roman Catholic Controversy" or on the other side try Karl Keating's book. Both of these writers do a good job of presenting the case as Christians ought to do, and include academically rigorous footnotes, bibiographies, etc. Those are good values for the money.

Pick a side, pick a better book. But don't pick this one. It is dramatically outdated and very often clearly incorrect regarding today's Roman Catholic church.

By way of disclosure, I'm Protestant clergy with a theology training from the University of Cambridge.

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by HisServant

Ultimately, members of a Church and Citizens of a country are responsible for their leadership...

One worldview must prevail, the question is: which one?

We've seen that theocracies don't work, be it secular or religious.

A society with Christian laws and culture, without attempting to force salvation on anyone, is the best.

[TruthSetsFree]

Originally Posted by Eeset

@truthsetsfree. You seem to be searching for an excuse for the atrocities committed in France against the Cathars. Let me see if I understand you correctly. You believe that if a person will not recant their belief in reincarnation then they should be tortured as a test and if they still will not recant then they should be put to death along with all family members and their property should be confiscated. Do I understand your position correctly?

when u anti Catholics start seeing what the protestants did to the Catholics

then maybe i will respond

in the meantime 4get it

200 priests killed by Protestants in France (Revolution)

priests killed in England under Henry VIII and others... just for saying Mass...

you people are so one sided...

just love to hate Christ's Church... weird... demonic

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

We've seen that theocracies don't work, be it secular or religious.

This theocrat is even alaCarte on theocracy

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by WizardofOz

This theocrat is even alaCarte on theocracy

Knight and Bob Enyart believe in a "constitutional monarchy". I haven't studied that yet, but it sounds plausible.

So tell me Ralphie, how is the legalization of recreational drugs, allowing fags to redefine marriage, pornography and abortion so-called "rights" going to make the US a better place?

I'm listening.

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Knight and Bob Enyart believe in a "constitutional monarchy". I haven't studied that yet, but it sounds plausible.

You claim that you defend the very founding fathers who fought against a monarchy? What a joke!

Yesterday a theocrat, today a monarchist, what will you be tomorrow other than alaCarte who changes with the wind?

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

So tell me Ralphie, how is the legalization of recreational drugs, allowing fags to redefine marriage, pornography and abortion so-called "rights" going to make the US a better place?

I'm listening.

You don't listen, that's your problem (one amongst a looooong list, anyway).

- End the federal war on drugs. States can criminalize or legalize drugs.

- I've told you I oppose "gay marriage" but this too should be up to each state. (See a pattern yet?)

- Porn is already legal, so If a state wanted to outlaw porn, they have that right.

- You already know my stance on abortion so quit playing dumb (I know, you're not playing).

Let me know when you decide between theocracy and monarchy so I can mock you accordingly.

[HisServant]

Originally Posted by WizardofOz

You claim that you defend the very founding fathers who fought against a monarchy? What a joke!

Yesterday a theocrat, today a monarchist, what will you be tomorrow other than alaCarte who changes with the wind?



You don't listen, that's your problem (one amongst a looooong list, anyway).

- End the federal war on drugs. States can criminalize or legalize drugs.

- I've told you I oppose "gay marriage" but this too should be up to each state. (See a pattern yet?)

- Porn is already legal, so If a state wanted to outlaw porn, they have that right.

- You already know my stance on abortion so quit playing dumb (I know, you're not playing).

Let me know when you decide between theocracy and monarchy so I can mock you accordingly.

Regardless, in order for a society to prosper, government size needs to be proportional to private production.

One of the main problems I see in America right now, be it liberal or conservative, is the disconnect between passing laws and understanding the funding needed to enforce hem.

In a budget constrained America, banning abortion is not something I currently think our government can enforce unless it decides not to enforce something else... and when you get to that point (like we are now) you basically give the chief executive the power to enforce only what furthers his/her agenda instead of the peoples will.

We need a serious conversation about just what the role of the federal and state governments are and whether we can afford the ideal or a constrained version of them.

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by HisServant

Regardless, in order for a society to prosper, government size needs to be proportional to private production.

One of the main problems I see in America right now, be it liberal or conservative, is the disconnect between passing laws and understanding the funding needed to enforce hem.

I agree in regard to programs such as the federal war on drugs, which is not only a failure but a counter-productive and expensive one!

Originally Posted by HisServant

In a budget constrained America, banning abortion is not something I currently think our government can enforce unless it decides not to enforce something else... and when you get to that point (like we are now) you basically give the chief executive the power to enforce only what furthers his/her agenda instead of the peoples will.

If abortion were illegal then most providers would shut down or stop offering the service (no tax funds involved). Sure, local police may have to investigate claims of abortionists illegally offering abortion services but I don't think state-level enforcement would be all that expensive. We already pay state police to investigate homicide as it is.

Originally Posted by HisServant

We need a serious conversation about just what the role of the federal and state governments are and whether we can afford the ideal or a constrained version of them.

I agree

[Guyver]

Originally Posted by TruthSetsFree

just love to hate Christ's Church... weird... demonic

Your first mistake, one that no one has called you out on...is assuming that the RCC is God's one true church.

The true church is the body of Christ, those that believe and accept his death, burial and resurrection as the penalty for their sins.... and receive Him as their savior.

Not some organization filled with all types of fruits and nuts. Get the story straight.

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Knight and Bob Enyart believe in a "constitutional monarchy". I haven't studied that yet, but it sounds plausible.

Originally Posted by WizardofOz

You claim that you defend the very founding fathers who fought against a monarchy? What a joke!

My claim is, and always has been that "Our constitution was made ONLY for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."

How should we go about returning to a nation of moral and religious people Ralphie, something that our Founding Fathers acknowledged that the constitution was written ONLY for?

Libertarians think that drugs should be legalized*, marriage should be redefined*, abortion should be allowed*, and pornography should continue to define American culture.
*As long as the majority in any respective state votes that way.

You and your nutcase Libertarian leaders need to be institutionalized (which would be my first act as King of America by the way).

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

(which would be my first act as King of America by the way).

Even the delusional are allowed to dream

Good luck with your American theocracy or constitutional monarchy or whatever other anti-American garbage you dream up tomorrow

[aCultureWarrior]

Gee, who would have thought?

"National Study: Teen "Heavy" Marijuana Use Up 80 Percent Since 2008, One in Ten Teens Reports Using Marijuana at Least 20 Times a Month"
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nat...nth-2012-05-02

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Gee, who would have thought?

"National Study: Teen "Heavy" Marijuana Use Up 80 Percent Since 2008, One in Ten Teens Reports Using Marijuana at Least 20 Times a Month"
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nat...nth-2012-05-02

Yeah, the federal war on drugs is really effective, isn't it?

[OMEGA]

The Church
"Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts
with Church dogma must be burned without pity."
- Pope Innocent III
The Inquisition was an ecclesiastical court and process of the Roman
Catholic Church setup for the purpose towards the discovery and punishment
of heresy which wielded immense power and brutality in medieval and early
modern times. The Inquisitions function was principally assembled to
repress all heretics of rights, depriving them of their estate and assets
which became subject to the ownership of the Catholic treasury, with each
relentlessly sought to destroy anyone who spoke, or even thought
differently to the Catholic Church. This system for close to over six
centuries became the legal framework throughout most of Europe that
orchestrated one of the most confound religious orders in the course of
mankind.

Inquisition Procedure
At root the word Inquisition signifies as little of evil as the primitive
"inquire," or the adjective inquisitive, but as words, like persons, lose
their characters by bad associations, so "Inquisition" has become infamous
and hideous as the name of an executive department of the Roman Catholic
Church.

All crimes and all vices are contained in this one word Inquisition.
Murder, robbery, arson, outrage, torture, treachery, deceit, hypocrisy,
cupidity, holiness. No other word in all languages is so hateful as this
one that owes its abhorrent preeminence to its association with the Roman
Church.

In the Dark Side of Christian History, Helen Ellerbe describes how the
same men who had been both prosecutor and judge decided upon the sentence
of heresy. Once an Inquisitor arrived to a heresy-ridden district, a 40
day period of grace was usually allowed to all who wished to confess by
recanting their faith.

After this period of grace had finished, the inhabitants were then
summoned to appear before the Inquisitor. Citizens accused of heresy would
be woken in the dead of night, ordered, if not gagged, and then escorted
to the holy edifice, or Inquisition prison for closer examination.

In 1244, the Council of Harbonne ordered that in the sentencing of
heretics, no husband should be spared because of his wife, nor wife
because of her husband, and no parent spared from a helpless child. Once
in custody victims waited before their judge anxiously, while he pondered
through the document of their accusation. During the first examination,
enough of their property was likewise confiscated to cover the expenses of
the preliminary investigation.

The accused would then be implicated and asked incriminating and luring
questions in a dexterous manner of trickery calculated to entangle most.
Many manual's used and promulgated were by the grand inquisitor Bernardus
Guidonis, the Author of Practica Inquisitionis (Practice of the
Inquisition) and the Directorium Inquisitorum (Guideline for Inquisitors)
completed by Nicolaus Eymerich, grand inquisitor of Aragon. These were the
authoritative text-books for the use of inquisitors until the issue of
Torquemada's instructions in 1483, which was an enlarged and revised
Directorium.
====================================
A Chapter of the Manual is headed "of the torture" and contains these
small reflections:
"The torture is not an infallible method to obtain the truth; there are
some men so pusillanimous that at the first twinge of pain they will
confess crimes they never committed; others there are so valiant and
robust that they bear the most cruel torments. Those who have once been
placed upon the rack suffer it with great courage, because their limbs
accommodate themselves to it with facility or resist with force; others
with charms and spells render themselves insensible, and will die before
they will confess anything."
The author gives further directions:
“When sentence of torture has been given, and while the executioner is
preparing to apply it, the inquisitor and the grave persons who assist
him should make fresh attempts to persuade the accused to confess the
truth; the executioners and their assistants, while stripping him,
should affect uneasiness, haste, and sadness, endeavoring thus to
instill fear into his mind; and when he is stripped naked the
inquisitors should take him aside, exhorting him to confess, and
promising him his life upon condition of his doing so, provided that he
is not a relapsed (one dilated a second time), because in such a case
they cannot promise him that."
--------------------------------------------------