The Inquisition ( Mass Killings of the Catholic )

The Inquisition

"The Christian resolve to find the world evil and ugly, has made the world evil and ugly." 
- Friedrich Nietzsche

Today, the xtian church does not have the power it once had, yet, we have witnessed the xtian abuses of children, child rape, molestation and other vile acts that reveal the true nature of many xtians and the effects their "god" has upon his followers. The pedophilia scandals are just a small sample of what xtians are capable of.

Years ago, when the xtian church had complete control over government, human life and spirit, we can see from the inquisition, just how sick these people are and just what lengths they will go to get you to accept "jesus." Just as is seen in the numerous xtian abuses of children today, years ago, with the inquisition, girls as young as nine and boys as young as ten were tried for witchcraft. Children much younger were tortured to extract testimony against their parents.¹ Children were then flogged while they watched their parents burn.
A documented case in the Silesian town of Neisse reveals a huge oven was constructed, which over a ten year period, more than a thousand "condemned witches, some as young as two years old" were roasted alive.² Many victims were also extremely old, some in their 80's. This made no difference to the church.

The xtian church murdered, tortured, mutilated and destroyed millions and millions of lives both directly through the Inquisition and indirectly through all of the wars they incited. The damage and destruction this foul religion has perpetrated against humanity is almost beyond comprehension. Most people aren't even aware of the facts. Between the years of 1450-1600, the xtian church was responsible for the torture, and burning of some 30,000 alleged "witches."³

During the reign of the Roman Emporer Constantine CE 306-337 the doctrines of the xtian church were regarded as the foundation of law.⁴ Heretics (persons who opposed church teachings) were sought out, tortured and eventually murdered. Heresy was an offense against the state as well as the church. For hundreds of years, civil rulers tried to stamp out all heresy.

As early as CE 430, the church leaders declared heresy punishable by death. In CE 906, "The Canon Episcopi" was the first church body to expressly forbid the use of witchcraft.⁵ Before the Inquisition was fully underway, the church accepted heretics back into the fold, under terms it considered reasonable. The following is an example:

For three Sundays, the heretic was stripped to the waist and whipped from the entrance of the town/village all the way to the church door. He/she was to permanently deny him/herself meat, eggs and cheese except on Easter, pentecost and xmas, when he/she is to eat of them as a sign of his/her penance. For twenty days, twice a year he/she was to avoid fish and for 3 days in each week fish, wine and oil, fasting, if his/her health would permit.

He/she was to wear monastic vestments with a small cross sewn on each breast. He/she was to hear mass daily. Seven times a day, he/she was to recite the canonical hours and in addition, at Paternoster ten times each day and twenty times each night.
He/she was to observe total abstinence from sex. Every month he/she was to report to a priest who was to keep the heretic under close observation. He/she was to be segregated from the rest of the community.⁶

There is no precise date for the beginning of the Inquisition, most sources agree it manifested during the first 6 years of the reign of the catholic pope, Gregory IX, between 1227 and 1233. Pope Gregory IX who ruled from 1227-1241 is often referred to as the "Father of the Inquisition."

The Inquisition was a campaign of torture, mutilation, mass murder and destruction of human life perpetrated by xtians. The church increased in power until it had total control over human life, both secular and religious.
The Vatican wasn't satisfied with the progress made by regional leaders in rooting out heresy. Pope Innocent III commissioned his own inquisitors who answered directly to him. Their authority was made official in the papal bull of March 25th, 1199.⁷Innocent declared "anyone who attempted to construe a personal view of god which conflicted with the church dogma must be burned without pity."⁸

In 1254, to ease the job of the inquisitors, Pope Innocent IV decreed that accusers could remain anonymous, preventing the victims from confronting them and defending themselves. Many churches had a chest where informants could slip written accusations against their neighbors. Three years later, he authorized and officially condoned torture as a method of extracting confessions of heresy. ⁹

Victims were tortured in one room,

then, if they confessed, they were led away from the chamber into another room to confess to the inquisitors.
 This way it could be claimed the confessions were given without the use of force. The Inquisitional law replaced common law. Instead of innocent until proven guilty, it was guilty until proven innocent.

Inquisitors grew very rich, accepting bribes and fines from the wealthy who paid to avoid being prosecuted. The wealthy were prime targets for the church who confiscated their property, land and everything they had for generations. The Inquisition took over all of the victims' possessions upon accusation. There was very little if any chance of proving one's self innocent, so this is one way the catholic church grew very wealthy. Pope Innocent stated that since "god" punished children for the sins of their parents, they had no right to be legal heirs to the property of their parents. Unless children came forth freely to denounce their parents, they were left penniless. Inquisitors even accused the dead of heresy, in some cases, as much as seventy years after their death. They exhumed and burned the accused's bones and confiscated all property from their heirs, leaving them with nothing. ¹⁰

The actions of the inquisitors had devestating effects on the economy that left entire communities totally impoverished while the church glutted with wealth. They also crippled the economy by holding certain professions suspect. Inquisitors believed the printed word to be a threat to the church and interfered with the communication brought about by the invention of the printing press in the 15th century. Maps, cartographers, traveling merchants and traders were all placed under intense suspicion; a threat to the church.

Although the church had begun murdering people it deemed heretics in the 4th century and again in 1022 at Orléan, papal statutes of 1231 insisted heretics suffer death by fire. Burning people to death prevented spilling of blood. John 15:6 "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned."
The nazarene quote incited all of this.

The pedophilia witnessed today is just a small example of the insanity and the twisted, warped minds of most xians and where any power that they obtain leads to.

The Witch hunts, 1450-1750 were what R H Robbins (The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology) called "the shocking nightmare, the foulest crime and deepest shame of western civilization." In this 300 year period, the church stepped up the mass murder and systematic torture of innocent human beings. Torturers were allowed as much time as they needed to torture their victims. Most courts demanded that prior to the torture, the victim be thoroughly shaved, claiming that any Demon left undetected in the victim's body hair might intervene to deaden the pain that the torturers inflicted or answer for the victim.¹¹

Doctors would be in attendance if it seemed the victim might die from the torture. The victim would then be allowed to recover a little before more torture was applied. If the victim died during the torture, inquisitors claimed the Devil intervened with the purpose of sparing the victim further pain or preventing them from revealing his secrets.¹² Those who fainted had vinegar poured into their nostrils to revive them. The victim's families were required under law to reimburse the courts for the costs of torture. Entire estates were seized by the church. Priests blessed the torture instruments prior to their being used. Certain devices were employed to inflict the maximum pain; indisputable evidence of the sick xtian mind:

Judas Cradle
 
The victim was pulled up by a rope or chain and then lowered to the point. The torturer controlled the pressure by attaching weights to the victim or rocking or raising and dropping the victim from various heights.

Brodequin (The Boots)

The brodequin was used to crush the legs by tightening the device by hand, or using a mallet for knocking in the wedges to smash the bones until the bone marrow spurted out. People who passed out were further condemned as the losing of consciousness to be a trick from the Devil in order to escape pain.

Burning the feet. Oil, lard and grease were applied to the feet before roasting them over a fire. A screen was used to control or increase the pain as exposure to the fire was applied on and off for maximum suffering. Also, as a variation, some victims were forced to wear large leather or metal boots into which boiling water or molten lead was poured.

Hanging and the Strappado
 
The victim's hands were bound behind the back. They were then yanked up to the ceiling of the torture chamber by a pulley and a rope. Dislocation ensued. Xtians preferred this method, as it left no visible marks of torture. Heavy weights were often strapped to the victim to increase the pain and suffering.
Squassation was a more extreme form of the torture. This method entailed strapping weights as much as hundreds of pounds, pulling limbs from their sockets. Following this, the xtian inquisitor would quickly release the rope so they would fall towards the floor. At the last second, the xtian inquisitioner would again yank the rope. This dislocated virtually every bone in the victim's body. Four applications were considered enough to kill even the strongest of victims.

Many were hung upsidedown as well until strangulation ensued.

Heretic's Fork


This device was often used to silence the victim on the way to the burning stake, so they could not reveal what had occurred in the torture chamber or defend themselves in any way.

Ripping the flesh
 
Xtian clergy delighted in the tearing and ripping of the flesh. The Catholic church learned a human being could live until the skin was peeled down to the waist when skinned alive. Often, the rippers were heated to red hot and used on women's breasts and in the genitalia of both sexes.

Breast Rippers

The Iron Torture Chair was studded with spikes. The victim was strapped in nude and a fire was lit beneath the chair. Heavy objects were also be used. They were placed upon the victim to increase the pain of the spikes. Blows with mallets were also inflicted. Often, other torturous devices were applied with the chair such as the flesh ripping pincers, shown above and leg crushing vices.

Skull Crusher
This one speaks for itself. Xtian clergy preferred this device because it did not leave visible marks, unless the skull was completely crushed, which happened.

The Rack

The Rack, aka the Ladder was another device that was used extensively. The procedure was to place the nude or near nude victim horizontally on the ladder or rack. Ropes were used to bind the arms and legs like a tourniquet. The knot could be steadily twisted to draw tight the ropes and stretch the victim to where the muscles and ligaments tore and bones broke. Often, heavy objects were placed upon the victim to increase the pain. This was considered by the church to be "one of the milder forms of torture."

The Wheel

The nude victim, was stretched out, lying face downward on the ground or on the execution dock, with his or her arms and legs spread, and tied to stakes or iron rings. Wooden crosspieces were placed under the wrists, elbows, ankles, knees and hips. The inquisitor then smashed limb after limb and joint after joint, including the shoulders and hips, with the iron-tyred edge of the wheel, taking care not to bring about the death of the victim. There were splinters of smashed bones, blood spurted everywhere and the victim's entire skeleton was crushed and smashed. Thereafter the shattered limbs were “braided” into the spokes of the large wheel. The wheel has to be one of the most gruesome of all torture devices. The idea is, that the victims' limbs are shattered and entwined around the spokes of the wheel, attaching them to it.

The Thumbscrew

The thumbscrew was a device where the victim's thumbs were placed and systematically crushed. Similar devices were used on the toes. Thumbscrews were often applied at the same time as the strappado and other torture devices to inflict more pain.

The Water Torture

The victim was stripped and bound to a bench or table and a funnel was inserted and pressed down into his throat. Water was poured into the funnel in jug fulls with his/her nose being pinched, forcing him/her to swallow. After this was repeated enough times to where the victim's stomach was almost to burst, the bench or table was then tilted, with the victim's head pointing to the floor. The water in the stomach put painful pressure on the victim's lungs and heart. There was not only the incredible pain with this, but also, the feeling of suffocation. Inquisitors would also beat upon the stomach with mallets to the point of internal rupture.
In another variation, the victim was forced to swallow large quantities of water together with lengths of knotted cord. The cords were then violently yanked from the victim's mouth resulting in disemboweling.

The Iron Maiden aka the "virgin mary"

Covering the front side of this device was a statue of the virgin bitch, inside were spikes, sharp knives or nails. Levers would move the arms of the statue, crushing the victim against the knives and nails.

Other devices and methods:

• Forced feeding of overly salted foods that resulted in extreme thirst, then, the denial of water.
• Immersion in scalding water laced with Lime.
• Yanking back and forth by 2 or more inquisitors with ropes attached to a spiked iron collar. This tore the flesh on the victim's neck. Variations used screws that could be tightened.
• The prayer stool. A spike board on which the victim was forced to kneel.
• Stocks which were fitted with iron spikes
• Slowly roasting victims over fire.
• "Walking a Witch" entailed forcing a victim to walk back and forth for days on end until completely exhausted. A variation of this was having the victim sit cross legged upon a wooden stool, being deprived of movement or sleep. Some victims were as much as 80 years old.
• "Thrawing." Similar to the spiked iron collar, only a rope was tied tightly around the head and the victim was yanked back and forth.
• "Turkas." These were a variation of pincers used to pull out fingernails.
• Many were thrown in filthy dungeons with no light or human contact, in addition, often being chained or confined in the stocks.
• "Scoring above the Breath" the ancient belief that bleeding a witch above the mouth and nose would break a spell incited inquisitors to tear flesh, stick with needles and other instruments upon the victim's face.

Galileo Galilei,the famous Italian astronomer and physicist was one of the most noted victims of the inquisition. A letter in which he attempted to demonstrate the Copernican theory, that the Earth is not the center of the universe, was forwarded by some of his enemies (xtians) to the inquisitors in Rome. He was tried in 1633 and found guilty of heresy. He was forced to recant (publicly withdraw his statement) and was sentenced to life imprisonment under house arrest.
In 1979, Pope John Paul II declared that the Roman Catholic Church "may have been mistaken in condemning him," and he established a commission to study the case.¹³
In 1993, the Catholic Church "officially" pardoned Galileo. In other words, they forgave him for teaching that the planets revolve around the Sun, not the Earth. (See the above link).

Loss of human life:

• Salzburg, Austria, 1677-1681 over 100 murdered
• Basque region of the Pyrenees; 1608, Lawyer Pierre de Lancre was sent to the region to "root out and destroy those who worshipped Pagan Gods." Over 600 tortured and murdered.
• Witch judge Henri Boguet c. 1550-1619 sent some 600 victims to their deaths in Burgundy, many of them young children who were systematically tortured and then burned alive.
• A pregnant woman was burned alive and from the trauma, she gave birth before she died. The baby was tossed back into the flames.
• Swedish town of Mora, 1669, more than 300 murdered. Among them, 15 children. 36 children between the ages of 9 and 15 were made to run the gauntlet and were beaten with rods upon their hands once a week for an entire year. Twenty of the youngest children, all under the age of 9 were whipped on their hands at the church door for 3 sundays in succession. Many more were severaly beaten for witchcraft offenses.
• In Scotland, under the rule of Oliver Cromwell, a total of 120 in a single month were murdered in 1661. Estimates of the total dead have been as high as 17,000 between 1563 and 1603.
• In Würzburg, Germany, the Chancellor wrote a graphic account in the year of 1629:
  "...there are three hundred children of three or four years, who are said to have had intercourse with the Devil. I have seen children of seven put to death, and brave little scholars of ten, twelve, fourteen and fifteen years of age..."
  Between the years of 1623 and 1633, some 900 "witches" were put to death throughout Würzburg. This was largely maintained by the Jesuits.
• The Chronicler of Treves reported in 1586 that the entire female population of two villages was wiped out by inquisitors. Only two women were left alive.
• Noted cases included the Knights Templar, Joan of Arc who was chained by the neck, hands and feet and locked in a cramped iron cage, Galileo, who stated that the Earth revolved around the Sun and was not the center of the universe as the church taught(See above).

The SAVAGE WOLVEs and the MEN who will DISTORT THE TRUTH

The SAVAGE WOLVEs that would come. The Men whol will DISTORT THE TRUTH.

The passage by Apostle Paul on what would likely occur after he leaves. That is when the APOSTASY would start, when the apostles have left.

I know that AFTER I LEAVE, SAVAGE WOLVES will come in AMONG YOU and WILL NOT SPARE THE FLOCK. Even FROM YOUR OWN NUMBER MEN will arise andDISTORT THE TRUTH in order to draw away disciples after them. Acts 20:23-34 (New International Version)

WHAT will surely come when apostle Paul had left? "SAVAGE WOLVES"

WHEN will this SAVAGE WOLVES come? apostle Paul says "AFTER I LEAVE".

And WHERE will these SAVAGE WOLVES come from? "will come in AMONG YOU "

And WHO are these SAVAGE WOLVEs and WHAT will they do? "FROM YOUR OWN NUMBER MEN will arise and DISTORT THE TRUTH in order TO DRAW AWAY disciples after them"

Some Catholic defenders would likely say that NOT ALL WILL BE APOSTATIZED or follow those men who will DISTORT THE TRUTH.

Fair enough now let me POINT YOU to the what apostle Paul said to those followers who remained faithful and would not follow these men who will DISTORT THE TRUTH. Will they be SPARED by these SAVAGE WOLVEs? "SAVAGE WOLVES will come in AMONG YOU and WILL NOT SPARE THE FLOCK"

Those who held on to the TRUTH even though they die will LIVE. Thats what Christ promised to his TRUE FOLLOWERs. Those who TURNED THEIR BACKs to the TRUTH and followed DECEIVING SPIRITS or the men who DISTORTs the TRUTH will be CONDEMNED.

So REMEMBER what apostle Paul had said when they leave, the one who will come AFTER THEM does not have in mind the WORK and FAITH of the apostle had.

He pointed out clearly that the men who will rise AMONG THEM will DISTORT THE TRUTH. Obviously those who will not follow them and remained FAITHFUL will NOT BE SPARED.

Take a good look to what the Catholic Authorities did to those who REFUSED to follow them. Remember the INQUISITION. Is this an act of CHRISTIANITY or BRUTALITY? Do you think that the TRUE CHURCH of CHRIST would CONDONE such ATROCITIES? obviously not.

Do you Catholics in all honesty believe that your Catholic Authorities ACTED based on the GOSPEL of Christ in TORTURING and BURNING people thru this Inquisition?

That is why the Iglesia Ni Cristo knows for sure that the APOSTASY pointed out by the apostles is TRUE.

Please take a good look, and understand the warning of apostle Paul on THOSE WHO so PROUDLY connect to the apostles thru historical and apostolic succession.

It is not a GUARANTEE but rather used to DECEIVE. For the scriptures ATTEST that the ones who will come when the apostles have left are the ones who will DISTORT THE TRUTH and WILL NOT SPARE THE FLOCK. Do take note of that.

For Apostle Paul pointed out clearly that the one who would succeed them will not be LIKE THEM nor will abide to what the apostles and Christ had preached. Apostle Paul said they are SAVAGE WOLVEs OF MEN WHO WILL RISE AMONG THEM TO DISTORT THE TRUTH with the intent to DRAW AWAY DISCIPLEs after them.

Take a good look which church ABANDONED the name of the CHURCH OF CHRIST for ANOTHER NAME. It is not surprising therefore that those who boast of APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION or HISTORICAL CONTINUITY are the ones apostles had WARNED who will DISTORT THE TRUTH and WILL NOT SPARE THE FLOCK.

The apostles taught that the only mediator between God and men is the man Jesus Christ. But they went even further to make Mary a MEDIATRIX. Was this ever preached by the apostles? What verse? the answer is obvious don't you think.

If you can't find it then you know that the APOSTASY that the apostles warned about was indeed TRUE.

They made for themselves IDOLs of WORSHIP to which the apostle have nothing to do with. What verse in the scriptures taught of this matter?

If catholics think that they are not worshipping those idols then why would one kneel and BOW DOWN to a block of wood or stone? or even PRAY to it what for? do be honest with yourselves.

If its just an honest representation, then what passage in the bible allows this type of practice of KNEELING & BOWING DOWN to these idols or even PRAYING to them, if it is just a REPRESENTATION? Remember Galatians:

IF ANYBODY is PREACHING to you a GOSPEL other than what you accepted, LET HIM BE ETERNALLY CONDEMNED!

So please be honest, where is it written or what gospel allows you to do this? The apostles with all certainty never taught such things. Nor ALLOWED this to happen during there time.

How about PURGATORY? where in the scriptures do you find that? Or the practice of INDULGENCE where in the scriptures, did the apostles ever taught that? Infant BAPTISM? did the apostle preach this? Remember this passage:

"DO NOT GO BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN." 1 Corinthians 4:6 (New International Version)

If the above teachings of the Catholics are the gospel taught by the apostles then WHERE in the scriptures can we find these teachings? If you can't find it then you know that those who preached these things WILL BE ETERNALLY CONDEMNED. Including those who follow them.

This is why we have come to this understanding that the Catholic Church is the fulfillment of Apostles prophecy of the APOSTASY. For they ABANDONED not only the faith taught by the apostles then but even ABANDONED the name of Christ Church... the Church of Christ.

If the Catholic Authorities gave DUE IMPORTANCE to the name of the CHURCH OF CHRIST then why would they abandon it for another?

Who do you think is the fulfillment of the prophecy on these SAVAGE WOLVEs referred to by Apostle Paul? of course those who came after the apostle had left are the MEN who will rise to DISTORT THE TRUTH.

These are the points I wish bring to your attention.

These are just one of the reasons I decided to pursue the teachings of the INC and was fortunate to have come to the true knowledge the scriptures provided.

We should all be concerned of the faith we have. The INC is not your enemy, our common enemy are the FALSE TEACHINGs being passed by false religions as if they are the gospel taught by Christ and the apostles.

The INC believe it or not does not consider catholics to be our enemies. For if that were true then there would never be converts like me. Whether you accept it or not most of the INC's came from the catholic denomination.

In behalf of the Iglesia Ni Cristo we would like to invite Catholics and other religions to consider attending our bible studiesand study the teachings of the Iglesia Ni Cristo.

Find out for yourself not from people who are CONDEMNED because they REFUSED to love the TRUTH and so be SAVED.

THEY PERISH because THEY REFUSED TO LOVE THE TRUTH and SO BE SAVED. ¹¹ For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the LIE¹² and so that all WILL BE CONDEMNED who have NOT BELIEVED THE TRUTH butHAVE DELIGHTED IN WICKEDNESS. Thessalonians 2:10-12 (NIV)

The TRUTH is WRITTEN in the scriptures be aware of that.

It is our GUIDING LIGHT.

Mislead in Practicing Idolatory

We should be WARY and CAREFUL in peoples misGUIDED belief on the term and practice of IDOLATORY. Or to put it simple WORSHIPPING OF IDOLs.
Catholic Defenders would NEVER ADMIT they're doing such things. They would NORMALLY DENY it and ACCUSE US of not being able to UNDERSTAND the TERM of WORSHIP, or VENERATE.

That is NOT SURPRISING at all. If you do not GIVE DUE IMPORTANCE to the TEACHINGs in the SCRIPTURES this warning will not be of use to you.

But I would like to point out that we should not wait till judgement day to find if we were wrong or not. That would be TOO LATE. Eternal Damnation is not some DUST to just SWEEP under the rug.

Do consider the points we raise here. I was a catholic before like many of my fellow brethren in the Iglesia Ni Cristo. It took years before I decided to study their doctrines to dispel any notions that my faith then didn't stand on SOLID GROUND. Little did I know my thinking on the INC change in just the first bible study.

Every questions I never got in my catholic bible study class were all answered one by one in those bible study with an INC church worker and a lot more than I expected. It was an amazing experience.

The INC worker was still a student yet he was able to pull out the answers in the SCRIPTURES. The answers were so plain and simple. An ORDINARY PERSON can easily understand.

And it got me thinking why our Catholic Priest mentor then found it hard to get the answers in the scriptures and mostly relied on his own thoughts.

The Catholic Authorities in my Jesuit school have never answered the lingering questions I lot us had then. We were just made to read passages in the bible and we would talk about it and reflect on it.

That was about it. We had a lot of questions but we just had to SATISFY ourselves with the priest understanding in his own thoughts and words.

The INC bible study was ENLIGHTENING but even then during the course of my research and study. I always placed this doubts in my head unless each and every questions in my mind were answered thru the scriptures.

I searched and studied and I found my answers in the Iglesia Ni Cristo. That is why I am no longer a Catholic. I am a TRUE CHRISTIAN as I carry the NAME of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Catholics ABANDONED the NAME of Christ Church when the APOSTLEs HAD LEFT.

As usual THEY WOULD DENY this but LIKE IDOL WORSHIP they are CAUGHT PRACTICING IT whether they DENY IT OR NOT. Their ACTIONs SPEAKS LOUDER than their WORDs of DENIAL.

It is often times quite AMUSING how they practice this form of DECEPTION. Well, we know that SATAN masquerades as an ANGEL OF LIGHT.

As a TRUE FOLLOWER of Jesus Christ the SCRIPTURE should serve as our sole guide not in peoples personal logic or understanding.

That is why the Catholics are often MISLEAD in PRACTICING IDOLATRY. The APOSTLE NEVER preached anything about what the CATHOLICs are practicing.

There USE of IMAGES AND IDOLS in WORSHIPPING the ALMIGHTY GOD or Jesus Christ was NEVER TAUGHT by the APOSTLES.

Again I say THIS IS NOT SURPRISING for the ONEs who will COME AFTER THE APOSTLEs had LEFT are the ONES WHO will DISTORT THE TRUTH.

And who do you think CAME AFTER THE APOSTLES dear people? APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION 101 there is NO OTHER RELIGION that can CLAIM this.

The Catholic Defenders so FONDLY LOVEs to POINT this out and if your not CAREFUL in accepting this FACT they will definitely turn on you LIKE THE SAVAGE WOLVEs that they are.

So do REMEMBER THAT. The Iglesia Ni Cristo has NO PROBLEMs with this FACT so with all DUE RESPECT we ACCEPT with GREAT HUMBLENESS that the APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION or the ONES WHO CAME AFTER THE APOSTLEs had LEFT are the CATHOLICs. No DOUBT ABOUT THAT.

That is why the Catholic Defenders should NOT BLAME US when the SCRIPTUREs states that the ONES who will COME AFTER the APOSTLE had LEFT are the ONES WHO WILL DISTORT THE TRUTH. Imagine that. Do TAKE NOTE of that.

Lets ESTABLISHED first this point. What is really the POSITION or DOCTRINE of the Catholics with regards to this IMAGES and IDOLs. Are these just a form of honest representations WITH NO INTENTION TO WORSHIP or VENERATE these IMAGES?

I was a Catholic and I KNOW that IMAGEs where not made just for honest representation or for honor of those depicted in those IMAGES. As a Catholic then we were TAUGHT TO WORHIP these IMAGES as though they were the REAL ones.

It is just AMUSING to read the DENIALs of these Catholic Defenders. They may deceived people with their usual ACCUSATIONs

That is why the pictures presented by a post of readmeinc accurately reflects the Catholics ACTUAL practice of WORSHIPPING these IMAGEs. There EXCUSE that it is just the SAME as having pictures of our mother or loved ones with NO INTENTION WHATSOEVER TO WORSHIP them. Remains to be just an EXCUSE and very poor if you ask me. And downright DECEPTIVE.

Lets quote some of the Catholics OWN teachings. They even WORHIP SAINTs which of course WAS NEVER TAUGHT by the APOSTLEs. And that form of WORSHIP is NOT ONLY CONFINED to their PERSONs but EXTENDS ALSO TO THEIR RELICs and IMAGEs.

Catholic catechism requires that members should have for themselves idols or images to worship:

“13. Is the WORSHIP of the SAINTs confined to their persons?—No; it EXTENDS also TO THEIR RELICs and IMAGEs… 15. Ought we to worship holy images?-- We should have, particularly in our churches, images of our lord, as also of the blessed Virgin and the saints, and we should pay them due honor andVENERATION.” (Catechism of Christian doctrine, no. 3, p. 87)

There you have it, our WITNESS here is the Catholics own TEACHINGs. That THEY WORSHIP SAINTs and it is NOT CONFINED ONLY to THE SAINTS PERSONs but EXTENDS also TO THEIR RELICs and IMAGEs.

So we should not really be SURPRISE if the Catholic Defenders would REFUTE their VERY OWN TEACHINGs. Because they NEED TO DENY it so as not to be ACCUSED of not following the teachings in the scriptures.

They have a great many EMBARRASSING HISTORY of DENIAL. Like the ATROCITIES of their INQUISITION. It took a good many decades for a POPE of theirs to COME OUT and ASK FORGIVENESS for that DARK MARK in their history. Its obvious they would rather DENY than ADMIT.

Their INABILITY to CONTAIN the SCANDALs of their PEDOPHILE PRIESTs who has wreck HAVOC on their very ORGANIZATION. Instead of FOLLOWING the Apostles to EXPEL WICKED Brethrens. They instead PROTECTED their WICKED PRIESTs.

They were FOUND TRANSFERRING these PEDOPHILEs to other parishes and so the SEXUAL PERVERSIONs of those priest FLOURISHED to a HAIL OF LAWSUITs of which the Catholic Authorities had to DECLARE BANKRUPTCY. Imagine that.

Its really no wonder that these Catholic Defenders are INTO DENIALs and FALSE ACCUSATIONs. They have a LONG HISTORY of that. Likewise its NO WONDER also that THEY WOULD RATHER PAY for the WICKEDNESS of their FELLOW PRIESTs rather than EXPELLING the WICKED AMONG THEM.

Such a DEVILISHLY IMMORAL ACT don't you think. Unless our Catholic Defenders would rather point it as an ACT OF CHRISTIANITY.

And these guys would like us to believe that THEY'RE NOT WORSHIPPING IDOLs. Although their VERY ACTIONs and INTENTIONs is quite clear. AnD clearly TAUGHT TO THEM.

So lets what a their Jesuit Priest teaches them (my thanks to readme for this quote):

Eduard Syndicus, a Jesuit Priest says:

“Moreover, following other schoolmen, Thomas also showed in a wonderful section of his summa Theologica, his understanding of the irrational element in the cult image and its veneration: When ONE TURNS to an IMAGE, he says in so far as it is a thing—either a painting or a statue—IT DESERVES the SAME REVERENCE as Christ himself.‘Since Christ is worshipped with humble veneration, IT FOLLOWs THAT HIS IMAGE, too, MUST BE WORSHIPPED with (relatively) humble veneration’ ”(Summa Theol. III, pu. 25, art. 3)(Early Christian Art, p.151)

The Catholic Defenders may DENY this and muddle us with their usual accusations but our WITNESS states clearly and CONTRADICTs whatever EXCUSES they would like to bring. Their priest points out clearly Catholics are are MADE TO WORSHIP THE IMAGE MISLEAD IN PRACTICING IDOLATRY:

‘Since Christ is worshipped with humble veneration, IT FOLLOWs THAT HIS IMAGE, too, MUST BE WORSHIPPED with (relatively) humble veneration’ ”

Catholics without a doubt are made to WORSHIP these IMAGEs or IDOLs. Thats a FACT. We do not accuse Catholics of something they are not doing. We simply state the FACT based on WHAT their CATHOLIC AUTHORITIES are ATTESTING.

Take a good look at what PAGANs are DOING with their IDOLs and IMAGEs of worship. I am REFERRING to their ACTIONs and their WAYs in WORSHIPPING their images. Is there any difference with what Catholics are doing with THEIR IMAGES AND IDOLs? quite Obvious don't you think.

I invite open minded people whether your a catholic or not to the bible studies of the Iglesia Ni Cristo. Know the TRUTH WRITTEN in the SCRIPTURES. Find out now before Judgement Day comes.

Was Peter Really was the First Pope of the Catholic Church?

THE BIBLE is replete with testimonies proving the importance of the true Church established by Christ for man's salvation. Our Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles underscored this in their teachings. A ware of this truth, many of the so called Christian churches today claim that theirs is the true one. Among the many claimants, one of the most ardent is the Catholic Church. It strongly asserts that it has in its possession the best proof of being the true Church. Says one of its authorities:

"The best proof that the Catholic Church is the true Church is that she is still ruled by the successors of St. Peter."(Commentary on the Official Catechism of the Philippines, p. 133)

The pope is allegedly the successor of Apostle Peter.

Catholics believe that Peter was the first vicar of Christ and was the first pope. A Catholic pamphlet asserts this, thus: "Yes, Peter was the first Vicar of Christ. . . Peter was the first Pope." (Why Millions call him ''Holy Father," p.6)

Surprisingly, however, this same pamphlet of the Catholic Church categorically states that "Christ Never Called Peter 'Pope' (Ibid. p. I). Yet, the Catholic Church complacently hinges its claim of being the true Church on Peter's alleged papacy. Such claim rests on the Catholic doctrine of apostolic succession which allegedly dates back from Peter and continues down to the present pope.

But can this doctrine stand the test of biblical and historical scrutiny? Is there truth to the allegation that Peter was pope or that he was once bishop of Rome? Church historian Renwick gives us this historical finding:

"We may note, however, that there was no foundation for the claim of the Roman Church that Peter was bishop of Rome for twenty-five years from 42 to 67 A.D." (The Story of the Church, pp. 14-15)

There is no historical evidence much less biblical basis, for the claim that Peter was once bishop of Rome. It is based only on legends. Author Loraine Boettner says in the book, Roman Catholicism:

"There is in fact no New Testament evidence, nor any historical proof of any kind, Peter ever was in Rome. All rests on legend." (p. 117)

It is sad to note that what the Catholic Church gives as the "best proof" in its claim of being the true church crumbles in the light of historical facts. At best, its claim concerning Peter is based only on legends. Any student of history worth his salt knows that testimonies based on traditions and legends are not reliable at all.

Authorities: Their Testimonies

Lest we be accused of being partial in presenting evidences belying the pronouncement of the Catholic Church concerning Peter upon which its claim of being the true Church hinges, let us take some of the testimonies of different authorities, including authorities of the Catholic Church itself. Did the early fathers of the Catholic Church support the idea that Peter once served as bishop in Rome and therefore, became the first pope of the Roman Church? Boettner gives this answer:

"All of this makes it quite certain that Peter never was in Rome at all. Not one of the early church fathers gives any support to the belief that Peter was a bishop in Rome until Jerome in the fifth century." (Roman Catholicism, p. 122)

The early fathers of the Catholic Church were not convinced that Peter had become bishop of Rome or that he ever had reached the place for that matter. Notably, they were not the only ones who dismissed this belief. Even Catholic scholars reject such claim. Bishop Stephen Neill says:

"Most scholars reject as unhistorical the tradition that the Apostle Peter was, and was recognized as being, the first Bishop of Rome." (The Christian Society, p. 36)

Catholic scholars themselves who know and understand their church history belie the claim of the Catholic Church. Even archaeologists who had done exhaustive research on the matter could not find any conclusive evidence that Peter the apostle had once visited Rome and became its first bishop or pope. Let's take this revealing account:

"Exhaustive research by archaeologists has been made down through the centuries to find some inscription in the Catacombs and other ruins of ancient places in Rome that would indicate that Peter at least visited Rome. But the only things found which gave any promise at all were some bones of uncertain origin. L.H. Lehmann, who was educated for the priesthood at the University for the Propagation of the Faith, in Rome, tells us of a lecture by a noted Roman archaeologist, Professor Marucchi, given before his class, in which he said that no shred of evidence of Peter's having been in the Eternal City had ever been unearthed, and of another archaeologist, Di Rossi who declared that for forty years, his greatest ambition had been to unearth in Rome some inscription which would verify the papal claim that the apostle Peter was actually in Rome, but that he was forced to admit that he had given up hope of success in his search. He had the promise of handsome rewards by the church if he succeeded." (Roman Catholicism, pp. 118-119)

In spite of the concerted efforts, motivation, and promise of handsome reward from the Catholic Church, archaeologists have failed in finding decisive evidence to prove the claim that Peter was the first bishop of Rome or that, at least, he had reached this ancient city. And although there were some bones found in the diggings, these were of uncertain origin. The pope himself, who is supposed to be a firm believer as he is the alleged successor of Peter, was skeptical that these "bones... were really those of... Peter." In the magazine TheSunday Times, published on December 24, 1950, the Roman pontiff came out with an announcement:

"...the Pope announced officially the discovery of the tomb of Saint Peter beneath the great Basilica which bears his name. But the Pope said that it was not possible to prove with certainty that the human bones found in the tomb were really those of Saint Peter." (pp. 1,2)

The Catholic faithful should ponder on this bold but honest-to-goodness admission from no less than the supreme head of the Catholic Church. At any rate, nobody can blame the pope for doubting the authenticity of the findings. The matter of apostolic succession upon which the papacy bases its authority has been a long standing controversy in the Catholic Church. At the Vatican Council in 1870, the papacy's theory of apostolic succession came under fire from a high-ranking official of the Catholic Church, Bishop Strossmayer. He said in his speech before his fellow bishops.

"Now, having read the whole New Testament, I declare before God, with my hand raised to that great crucifix, that I have found no trace of the papacy as it exists at this moment." [Bishop Strossmayer's Speech (in the Vatican Council of 1870), p. 4]

Bishop Strossmayer testified that there is no trace of the papacy in the New Testament. He was that certain that he made his testimony with a solemn oath. This coming from no ordinary authority of the Catholic Church. Who was Bishop Strossmayer? Below are some data about him:

"STROSSMAYER, JOSEPH GEORGE (1815-1905). Roman Catholic Bishop. Born of German parents in Croatia, he was ordained to the priesthood in 1838 and nine years later, became professor of canon law at Vienna. In 1850, he was elevated to the bishopric of Bosnien with its seat at Diakovar." ( The New Intemational Dictionary of the Christian Church)

Startling as the account may seem, this bishop delivered his speech before a great council of the Catholic Church where almost all its bishops in various parts of the world were represented. Going further into his speech, he said:

"Finding no trace of the papacy in the days of the apostles I said to myself, I shall find what I am in search of in the annals of the church. Well, I say it frankly I have sought for a pope in the first four centuries, and I have not found him." [Bishop Strossmayer's Speech (in the Vatican Council of 1870), p. 10]

Having found no trace of the papacy in the era of the apostles in the New Testament, the good bishop continued his search in the annals of church history but, alas, he found out that there was no trace of the papacy in the first four centuries after the death of the apostles either. His findings were a devastating blow on the allegation that Apostle Peter had reached Rome and served as its bishop. Said he:

"But it is said on all sides, Was not St. Peter at Rome? Was he not crucified with his head down? Are not the pulpits in which he taught, the altars at which he said the mass, in this eternal city? St. Peter having been at Rome, my venerable brethren, rests only on tradition..." (Ibid, p. 9)

There is no evidence in both the New Testament and history books that Peter ever was in Rome. Thus, the papacy's claim of apostolic succession is plainly baseless. And, instead of coming out with positive evidence for the alleged authority and infallibility of the papacy, Strossmayer came out with this revealing conclusion:

"This century is unfortunate, as for nearly 150 years the popes have fallen from all the virtues of their predecessors, and have become apostates rather than apostles' ." (Ibid, p. 20)

His words said it all. The Catholic Church is not the true Church. It is the apostate Church.

Against Biblical Facts

The claim that Apostle Peter had once become a bishop of Rome is against the teachings of the Bible. Peter had a particular assignment where he performed his ministry. In Galatians 2:7-8, this is recorded:

"On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as Peter had been to the Jews. "For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles." (New Intemational Version)

Rome was known to be a Gentile world. It was Apostle Paul, not Apostle Peter, who had jurisdiction over the Gentiles as he was particularly assigned as the apostle to the Gentiles. Peter was apostle to the Jews and he could not have left his post and gone to Rome to preach there. It is not surprising, therefore, that church historians and even Catholic authorities themselves could not find any trace or indication that Apostle Peter had ever been in Rome and assumed the office of Bishop in that ancient city.

Nothing But Assumptions

In its efforts to establish link with the apostles, particularly Apostle Peter, and secure the authority of the papacy, the Catholic Church was forced to introduce various assumptions which, unfortunately, are all unwarranted:

"Between assigning Peter a foremost part in founding the church at Jerusalem and ordaining him to a perpetual incarnation in a succession of bishops at Rome, there is an immeasurable gulf. To bridge over this gulf, and to establish its theory of the papacy, Romanism is obliged to introduce a whole mass of assumptions. (1) It assumes that a constitutional primacy, or a primacy of governing authority over the whole Church, was vested in Peter from the outset. But where is the evidence for such a primacy? Not a trace of it can be found in the New Testament; Not a solitary instance is on record in which Peter is represented as acting as supreme governor of the Church ... (2) Romanism assumes that this (imagined) constitutional authority of Peter was transmitted by him to a single successor. For this, too, there is no proper historical warrant: it is unproved assumption. (3) Romanism assumes that this successor to the constitutional primacy of Peter was the Bishop of Rome. But why the Bishop of Rome rather than the Bishop of Jerusalem or of Antioch? It is not to be taken as a matter of course that Peter would transmit his authority to the Bishop of Rome. "The New Testament does not so much as give us a single unmistakable intimation that Peter was ever in Rome; and, even if the reality of such a visit be allowed, his connection with the church at Rome remains before the eyes of history a dim and misty thing compared with his connection with the church at Jerusalem. There is nothing in the nature of the case to assure us that Peter would fix upon the Bishop of Rome The Roman theory runs here into the region of pure assumption, and impinges, moreover, upon a very considerable incongruity." (History of the Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 70-72)

The afore mentioned passage is clear and self-explanatory. The so called theory of apostolic succession upon which the Catholic Church hinges its claim of being the true Church is unfounded. To establish the papacy's succession to the apostles, particularly Peter, the Roman Catholic Church had to concoct various assumptions which could not be proven by historical facts, much less, by accounts in the New Testament. Moreover, in their vain attempt to strengthen the alleged authority of the papacy, the Catholics resorted to fraud and falsification. In the book, Mat's Behind the New World Order, page 8, this is stated:

"About the close of the eighth century, papists put forth the claim that in the first ages of the church the bishops of Rome had possessed the same spiritual power which they now assumed. To establish this claim, ancient writings were forged by monks. Decrees of councils before unheard of were discovered, establishing the universal supremacy of the pope from the earliest times."

The Catholic Church, apparently, wouldn't hesitate to resort to desperate means just to prove its claim. Its success in strengthening the papacy's position throughout the centuries is attributed to deceit and fraud as attested by historical records, thus:

"The papacy was also aided by the scheming efforts of men who, through deceit and fraud, succeeded in strengthening the pope's position and authority." (The Church in History, p. 77)

Examples of documents falsified by scheming men in the Catholic Church just to fortify the authority and position of the papacy were the "Isidorian Decretals" and the "Donation of Constantine" says church historian Kuiper:

"Then somewhere around the middle of the ninth century there appeared a second mysterious document. It was called the 'Isidorian Decretals', because these decretals, or decisions, were claimed to have been collected by Isidore of Seville. This document consisted of decisions of popes and councils from Clement of Rome in the first century to Gregory II in the eighth.

"... For hundreds of years these documents were accepted at face value and regarded as genuine. Nicholas de Cusa in 1433 was the first one to suggest that the decretals were a forgery. After that they came to be called the 'Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals'. [Pseudo means 'false' , or 'pretended'.] In 1440 Lorenzo Valla proved that the' Donation of Constantine' was a forgery. Today, Catholic scholars agree with Protestant scholars that both documents are spurious." (Ibid., pp. 78-79)

One thing is certain in all the cited historical facts - that there is no truth to the claim that the Catholic Church is the true Church. Its supposedly "best proof" has been proven to be unfounded having been based on nothing but speculation, tradition, falsehood, deceit, and fraud.