But what if that is just the Catholic spin to the story?

Zobel said:

---

Tyndale was not executed for his translation efforts. He also wasn't tried or executed by the roman catholic church. He also wasn't killed by being burned at the stake - he was strangled, and then his body was burned.

He's become a martyr saint for Protestants, and in people take great liberty with his hagiography acting as if English translations didn't exist before him and would not exist but for him.

---

You know how I know you didn't watch the video I posted?

Unam Sanctam

Quote:

---

We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal. For when the Apostles say: 'Behold, here are two swords' [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: 'Put up thy sword into thy scabbard' [Mt 26:52]. Therefore, both are in the power of the Church, namely, the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly, the former is to be exercised by the Church. The former is of the priest; the latter is by the hand of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

---

It's a neat little trick Rome plays to blame it on the state while also claiming power over the state....

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

I thought about editing my post to add this, but will just make another post.

The claim that:

Quote:

---

Recent popes have argued the circumstances are no longer extreme due to the lack of deterrence of the death penalty and modern incarceration efficiency. If killing a person who is no risk to escape and whose death doesnt deter more killing why do it?

---

It's not scriptural at all, but I could find agreement with this for the mentally insane who are a true threat to society.

But what was Tyndall's crime?

He disagreed with Rome. He printed a Bible in English. I'm not aware of him murdering anyone. Or stealing or anything nefarious. He simply disagreed with Rome and for that he was burned at the stake.

We have modern Bibles printed with all kinds of nonsense. Are you suggesting we throw bible editors into jail that print stuff Rome doesn't like? That would be the only consistent interpretation of your claim.

---

Who actually put Tyndale to death?

---

Rome, hiding behind the the state.

But as Pope Boniface VIII said:

Quote:

---

For when the Apostles say: 'Behold, here are two swords' [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: 'Put up thy sword into thy scabbard' [Mt 26:52]. Therefore, both are in the power of the Church, namely, the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly, the former is to be exercised by the Church. The former is of the priest; the latter is by the hand of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

---

Why would a pope reference to kings and soldiers if he didn't intend to use them to carry out these actions?

---

I can assure you that Pope Boniface the VIII had no intention of using the state to execute William Tyndale.

Quo Vadis? said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

I thought about editing my post to add this, but will just make another post.

The claim that:

Quote:

---

Recent popes have argued the circumstances are no longer extreme due to the lack of deterrence of the death penalty and modern incarceration efficiency. If killing a person who is no risk to escape and whose death doesnt deter more killing why do it?

---

It's not scriptural at all, but I could find agreement with this for the mentally insane who are a true threat to society.

But what was Tyndall's crime?

He disagreed with Rome. He printed a Bible in English. I'm not aware of him murdering anyone. Or stealing or anything nefarious. He simply disagreed with Rome and for that he was burned at the stake.

We have modern Bibles printed with all kinds of nonsense. Are you suggesting we throw bible editors into jail that print stuff Rome doesn't like? That would be the only consistent interpretation of your claim.

---

Who actually put Tyndale to death?

---

Rome, hiding behind the the state.

But as Pope Boniface VIII said:

Quote:

---

For when the Apostles say: 'Behold, here are two swords' [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: 'Put up thy sword into thy scabbard' [Mt 26:52]. Therefore, both are in the power of the Church, namely, the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly, the former is to be exercised by the Church. The former is of the priest; the latter is by the hand of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

---

Why would a pope reference to kings and soldiers if he didn't intend to use them to carry out these actions?

---

I can assure you that Pope Boniface the VIII had no intention of using the state to execute William Tyndale.

---

And I can assure you that Boniface and other popes felt the state was subject to the church and would be the secular sword and used it as such.

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

I thought about editing my post to add this, but will just make another post.

The claim that:

Quote:

---

Recent popes have argued the circumstances are no longer extreme due to the lack of deterrence of the death penalty and modern incarceration efficiency. If killing a person who is no risk to escape and whose death doesnt deter more killing why do it?

---

It's not scriptural at all, but I could find agreement with this for the mentally insane who are a true threat to society.

But what was Tyndall's crime?

He disagreed with Rome. He printed a Bible in English. I'm not aware of him murdering anyone. Or stealing or anything nefarious. He simply disagreed with Rome and for that he was burned at the stake.

We have modern Bibles printed with all kinds of nonsense. Are you suggesting we throw bible editors into jail that print stuff Rome doesn't like? That would be the only consistent interpretation of your claim.

---

Who actually put Tyndale to death?

---

Rome, hiding behind the the state.

But as Pope Boniface VIII said:

Quote:

---

For when the Apostles say: 'Behold, here are two swords' [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: 'Put up thy sword into thy scabbard' [Mt 26:52]. Therefore, both are in the power of the Church, namely, the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly, the former is to be exercised by the Church. The former is of the priest; the latter is by the hand of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

---

Why would a pope reference to kings and soldiers if he didn't intend to use them to carry out these actions?

---

I can assure you that Pope Boniface the VIII had no intention of using the state to execute William Tyndale.

---

And I can assure you that Boniface and other popes felt the state was subject to the church and would be the secular sword and used it as such.

---

What was Boniface's reaction to Tyndale's execution? Did he condemn it?

Quote:

---

Will be difficult to answer, as he was dead for several hundred years at the time of Tyndale's execution.

---

Ah, sorry, I assumed from the discussion that he was the Pope at the time.

What did the Pope in power at the time of the execution say of it. Did he condemn it?

Also, the MO of the RCC at the time was for the RCC to conduct the inquisition and then to turn the person, if found guilty by the RCC inquisition, to the secular power for punishment, including death. That was what happened to Tyndale (his RCC inquisitor was apparently Jacob Latomus) and was also the standard MO during the Spanish Inquisition.

In other words, the RCC cannot wash its hands of all the murders that were committed by trying to fob them off on the "state". The RCC was an integral part of the process and not only approved, but encouraged the state to kill off people that the RCC decided were heretics or merely politically dangerous to the RCC.

The RCC saw the state as subject to the RCC and to the directives and control of the RCC.

Jabin said:

---

Quote:

---

Will be difficult to answer, as he was dead for several hundred years at the time of Tyndale's execution.

---

Ah, sorry, I assumed from the discussion that he was the Pope at the time.

What did the Pope in power at the time of the execution say of it. Did he condemn it?

Also, the MO of the RCC at the time was for the RCC to conduct the inquisition and then to turn the person, if found guilty by the RCC inquisition, to the secular power for punishment, including death. That was what happened to Tyndale (his RCC inquisitor was apparently Jacob Latomus) and was also the standard MO during the Spanish Inquisition.

In other words, the RCC cannot wash its hands of all the murders that were committed by trying to fob them off on the "state". The RCC was an integral part of the process and not only approved, but encouraged the state to kill off people that the RCC decided were heretics or merely politically dangerous to the RCC.

The RCC saw the state as subject to the RCC and to the directives and control of the RCC.

---

Yes, AgLiving just pulled a quote from a Pope from 200+ years before the fact and decided to run with it as if it was somehow germane to the topic at hand.

Be that as it may, the RCC was actually a force tying to stop the state from so many executions. Look at the following statements issued by the Catholic Church during the first half of the 2nd millennium

1179 - 11th ecumenical council "the discipline of the church should be satisfied with the judgement of the priest and should not cause the shedding of blood

1215 a 12th ecumenical council (paraphrase) - no cleric can decree, announce or carry out a sentence involving the shedding of blood, or announce a punishment thereof under penalty of ecclesiastical censure. Goes on to say the shedding of blood is the purview of the state not the church.

1234 - Pope Gregory IX makes the above conciliar ruling canon law.

1252- Pope Innocent IV - the state must force all the heretics, without killing them or breaking limbs to confess their errors and and accuse other heretics they know

1323 - book of sentences of the inquisition (paraphrased) we confirm your heresy but turn you over to the authorities without harming you

1376 - directory of the inquisition (my favorite) We dismiss you from our ecclesiastical forum and abandon you to the secular arm. BUT WE STRONGLY BESEECH THE SECULAR COURT TO MITIGATE ITS SENTENCE IN SUCH A WAY AS TO AVOID BLOODSHED OR DANGER OF DEATH.

What actions did the church take to enforce those statements? Why did it keep handing off prisoners to the state for execution? Why did it work hand in glove with the state in executing people for centuries after those statements?

What was the role of the church in the Spanish Inquisition?

Jabin said:

---

What actions did the church take to enforce those statements? Why did it keep handing off prisoners to the state for execution? Why did it work hand in glove with the state in executing people for centuries after those statements?

What was the role of the church in the Spanish Inquisition?

---

What do you want me to say brother? That's 4 questions in one post.

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Jabin said:

---

What actions did the church take to enforce those statements? Why did it keep handing off prisoners to the state for execution? Why did it work hand in glove with the state in executing people for centuries after those statements?

What was the role of the church in the Spanish Inquisition?

---

What do you want me to say brother? That's 4 questions in one post.

---

I apologize. I did not know there was a limit. Is that in the user rules or someplace?

Jabin said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Jabin said:

---

What actions did the church take to enforce those statements? Why did it keep handing off prisoners to the state for execution? Why did it work hand in glove with the state in executing people for centuries after those statements?

What was the role of the church in the Spanish Inquisition?

---

What do you want me to say brother? That's 4 questions in one post.

---

I apologize. I did not know there was a limit. Is that in the user rules or someplace?

---

There's not a limit, I'm just no sure where you're trying to go. I wrote you a very long and lengthy post to answer your previous question, only to have you fire back with four more.

You got foured.

Well, all of the questions are closely related. I'm genuinely not sure to what you're objecting.