Catholics often say that our authority should be both scripture and Catholic (not Orthodox) church tradition. By church tradition they mean the official teachings of popes, plus church councils plus other Christian writings. Let's take a look at some of these traditions that have had authority of the Catholic Church: The Papal bulls regarding the inquisition, the index of forbidden books, the false decretals, the character of some of the popes, and finally, all the theology in the Malleus Maleficarum about women against witchcraft.

The Inquisition

See the picture at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture

In Dictatus Papae (probably 1075 A.D.), Pope Gregory VII said, "The Roman Church was founded by God alone; the Roman pope alone can with right be called universal; he alone may use the imperial insignia; his feet only shall be kissed by all princes; he alone may depose the emperors; he himself may be judged by no one; the Roman Church has never erred, nor will it err in all eternity." (Austin's Topical History of Christianity p.165.)

From Roman Catholicism Issues & Evidences by Richard Knolls Ankerberg Press, Gregory VII said,

2. Only the Roman Pontiff is rightly called universal.

3. he alone can depose or absolve bishops.

9. The pope is the only man to whom all princes bend the knee.

12. He is allowed to depose emperors.

16. No general synod can be convened without an order.

18. His sentence cannot be repealed by anyone and he alone can repeal all other sentences.

19. He must not be judged by anyone.

22. The Roman church has never erred; and according to the testimony of scripture it never will err.

27. The pope can absolve subjects from oaths of fidelity made to unjust rulers.

The inquisition stated under Gregory IX sometime between 1227 and 1233. "Gregory IX included in his register in 1224 constitution of Frederick II, which permitted the burning at the stake of heretics." The Inquisition : Hammer of Heresy p.33

In February 1231, Gregory IX issued the constitution Excommunicamus against both heretics and even those who merely do not denounce the heretics they might know to the authorities. It included life imprisonment for unrepentant heretics, the right to appeal was denied, and their homes were destroyed.

On October 11, 1231, Papal bull Ille humani generis The Inquisition : Hammer of Heresy p.35-36: "When you arrive in a town, you will summon the prelates, clergy and people, and you will preach a solemn sermon: then you will assume several discreet persons as assistants and begin your enquiry into beliefs of heretics and suspects with diligent care (they will albreay have been denounced). Those who, after examination, are recognized as guilty or suspected of heresy must promise to boey the orders of the Church absolutely; if they do not, you should proceed against them, following the statutes that we have recently promulgated against the heretics."

May 13, 1239, 183 Cathars burned at the stake. Alberic des Trois-Fontaines described it as "a holocaust, very great and pleasing to God."(p.37)

Papal Bull by Innocent IV Ad Extirpanda approved the use of torture in northern Italy and later all of Italy.

1256 Pope Alexander IV gave inquisitors the right to mutually absolve one another and grant dispensation to each other for torture. (p.62)

On July 21, 1542, Paul III refounded the Roman Inquisition with papal bull Licet ab init.

On May 28, 1252, Bull Cum Adversus Haereticam torture to obtain confessions, death penalty at the stake and a police force for the Office of Faith (i.e. the Inquisition)

"As the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick has pass certain laws against the heretical evil, by which laws the spread of this plague might be hindered, and as we desire that these laws be observed for the strengthening of the faith and the salvation of the faithful, so we order the beloved sons who are in authority to incorporate these laws, whose exact wording is attached, into their statues, and to proceed against the heretics with great zeal. Therefore we order you [the inquisitors], when these authorities fulfill our orders carelessly, to force them to compliance by means of excommunication and interdiction ... We utterly curse those who have fallen from the Catholic faith, we pursue them with punishment, we rob them of their fortunes, deny them succession and revoke any and all their rights."

Innocent IV, in his bull "Ad exstirpanda" of 1252, called for the use of torture and its canonical regulation in the fight against "heretics" in northern Italy. This policy expanded to include all of Italy in 1256 and was confirmed in the following years by Popes Alexander IV and Clemens IV. In 1261 Urban IV allowed inquisitors, under whose direction delinquents expired from this rather more robust manner of opinion research, to mutually absolve one another. It was after all not permitted to torture to death a person being questioned. In such a case the inquisitor would face excommunication, from which he could be immediately freed, however, by a priest of the Inquisition uttering the formula: Ego te absolvo.

On March 30, 1254 Innocent IV gave the bull Super Extirpatione

The Council of Constance was called in 1415 primarily to settle the division among the three simultaneous Popes, for all saw that this division, and even granting indulgences to those who participated in a crusade against a rival Pope, were harmful to the respect people had for the Catholic Church. At the Council the writings of John Wycliffe were condemned, and Jan Huss was burned to death.

December 5, 1484 Innocent VIII issued the papal Bull Summis desiderantes Bullarium Romanum (Taurinensis editio), sub, anno 1484. Innocent, bishop, servant of the servants of God, Ad futuram rei memoriam.
Desiring with supreme ardor, as pastoral solicitude requires, that the catholic faith in our days everywhere grow and flourish as much as possible, and that all heretical depravity be put far from the territories of the faithful, we freely declare and anew decree this by which our pious desire may be fulfilled, and, all errors being rooted out by our toil as with the hoe of a wise laborer, zeal and devotion to this faith may take deeper hold on the hearts of the faithful themselves.
It has recently come to our ears, not without great pain to us, that in some parts of upper Germany, as well as in the provinces, cities, territories, regions, and dioceses of Mainz, Ko1n, Trier, Salzburg, and Bremen, many persons of both sexes, heedless of their own salvation and forsaking the catholic faith , give themselves over to devils male and female, and by their incantations, charms, and conjurings, and by other abominable superstitions and sortileges, offences, crimes, and misdeeds, ruin and cause to perish the offspring of women, the foal of animals, the products of the earth, the grapes of vines, and the fruits of trees, as well as men and women, cattle and flocks and herds and animals of every kind, vineyards also and orchards, meadows, pastures, harvests, grains and other fruits of the earth; that they afflict and torture with dire pains and anguish, both internal and external, these men, women, cattle, flocks, herds, and animals, and hinder men from begetting and women from conceiving, and prevent all consummation of marriage; that, moreover, they deny with sacrilegious lips the faith they received in holy baptism; and that, at the instigation of the enemy of mankind, they do not fear to commit and perpetrate many other abominable offences and crimes, at the risk of their own souls, to the insult of the divine majesty and to the pernicious example and scandal of multitudes. And, although our beloved sons Henricus Institoris and Jacobus Sprenger, of the order of Friars Preachers, professors of theology, have been and still are deputed by our apostolic letters as inquisitors of heretical depravity, the former in the aforesaid parts of upper Germany, including the provinces, cities, territories, dioceses, and other places as above, and the latter throughout certain parts of the course of the Rhine; nevertheless certain of the clergy and of the laity of those parts, seeking to be wise above what is fitting, because in the said letter of deputation the aforesaid provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and other places, and the persons and offences in question were not individually and specifically named, do not blush obstinately to assert that these are not at all included in the said parts and that therefore it is illicit for the aforesaid inquisitors to exercise their office of inquisition in the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and other places aforesaid, and that they ought not to be permitted to proceed to the punishment, imprisonment, and correction of the aforesaid persons for the offences and crimes above named. Wherefore in the provinces, cities, dioceses territories, and places aforesaid such offences and crimes, not without evident damage to their souls and risk of eternal salvation, go unpunished.
We therefore, desiring, as is our duty, to remove all impediments by which in any way the said inquisitors are hindered in the exercise of their office, and to prevent the taint of heretical pravity and of other like evils from spreading their infection to the ruin of others who are innocent, the zeal of religion especially impelling us, in order that the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and places aforesaid in the said parts of upper Germany may not be deprived of the office of inquisition which is their due, do hereby decree, by virtue of our apostolic authority, that it shall be permitted to the said inquisitors in these regions to exercise their office of inquisition and to proceed to the correction, imprisonment, and punishment of the aforesaid persons for their said offences and crimes, in all respects and altogether precisely as if the provinces, cities, territories, places, persons, and offences aforesaid were expressly named in the said letter. And, for the greater sureness, extending the said letter and deputation to the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, places, persons, and crimes aforesaid, we grant to the said inquisitors that they or either of them joining with them our beloved son Johannes Gremper, cleric of the diocese of Constance, master of arts, their present notary, or any other notary public who by them or by either of them shall have been temporarily delegated in the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and places aforesaid, may exercise against all persons, of whatsoever condition and rank, the said office of inquisition, correcting, imprisoning, punishing and chastising, according to their deserts, those persons whom they shall find guilty as aforesaid.
And they shall also have full and entire liberty to propound and preach to the faithful word of God, as often as it shall seem to them fitting and proper, in each and all of the parish churches in the said provinces, and to do all things necessary and suitable under the aforesaid circumstances, and likewise freely and fully to carry them out.

And moreover we enjoin by apostolic writ on our venerable brother, the Bishop of Stratsburg, that, wither in his own person or through some other or others solemnly publishing the foregoing wherever, whenever, and how often soever he may deem expedient... he permit [these inquisitors] not to be molested or hindered in any manner whatsoever by any authority whatsoever in the manner of the aforesaid and present letter, threatening all opposers... they may be, with excommunication, suspension, interdict and still other more terrible sentences, censures, and penalties.

Let no man, therefore, dare to infringe this page of our declaration, extension, grant, and mandate, or with rich hardihood to contradict it. If any presume this, let him know that he incurs the wrath of almighty God and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul.

Given in Rome, at St. Peter's in the year of Our Lord's incarnation 1484, on the nones of December, in the first year of our pontificate

Council of Trent 1545-1564 A.D. condemned Martin Luther to Hell. It reconvened a number of times, because bubonic plague broke out in the cities where it was held.

An Augustinian poet, Luis de Leon was imprisoned from 1572-1576, and again denounced in 1580 and 1582. He was accused of lack of respect for the saints who validated the vulgate and believing the Jews had not corrupted the Bible. (p.146)

The Index of Forbidden Books

Index of forbidden books. Copernicus' The Revolution of the Celestial Orbs was put on this list in 1616. Kepler's Tome of the Astronomy of Copernicus was put on the list in 1619. (p.163)

The Inquisition issued a condemnation of Galileo on Feb. 24, 1616 Censura facta in S. Officio Urbis." (p.170)

Gregory I (pope 590-604) said, "St. Peter is not called Universal Apostle; the whole church falls from its place when he [Christ] who is called Universal falls. But far from Christian hearts be that blasphemous name [of Universal Apostle]. I confidently affirm that who so calls himself, or desires to be called Universal Priest, in his pride goes before Antichrist (To the Emperor Maurice, Epistla 5:20-7:33).

1184 at the Synod of Verona the Pope issued a Bull called ab Abolendum condemning the Waldenses.

1197 The Council of Verona condemned the Waldenses to be burned to death.

Later 80 of them were burned to death in Strasbourg

1487-1488 Pope Innocent VIII called for a Crusade to exterminate the Waldenses in France.

Fourth Lateran Council started 11/1/1215. It authorized a Crusade in 1217, and in its third canon dealt with the suppression of heretics. Canon 3 said that heretics that were found guilty were to be handed over to the secular authority for [unspecified] punishment. This was called "animadversion debita" but in practice was burning at the stake. Feudal lords were to expel heretics from their land. The Inquisition: The Hammer of Heresy p.29.

The false decretals are 100 letters establishing the authority of the Popes. In them, Peter says that he was given authority to head Christ's church on earth. Peter passed this authority to the next Pope, etc..

Most false decretals are "Pseudo-Isidorian" Decretals, named after a man describing himself as "Isidore Mercator" who apparently wrote them in France and brought them to Metz, Germany between 847-859 A.D. They purport to be letters of Popes and church councils from 78-731 A.D. There are many plagiarized quotes, but overall the style is of one person.

Apparently the main motive behind the Decretals was to establish more independence for the local bishops by saying they were responsible not to the metropolitans, synods, or the state, but only the pope. The false Decretals had the profound effect of elevating the popes to a position greater than anybody else on this earth.

The Decretals were used at the Synods of Worms (868), Cologne (887), Metz (893), and Tribur (895). The Orthodox church never accepted them, and they were rejected as forgeries in the west ~1100 A.D. Two insurmountable problems are that nobody ever heard of them before 850 A.D., and they have many historical anachronisms, i.e. "how come Popes quoted people born after their death?". Nevertheless, even in 1580 the Catholic Corpus Juris used the false decretals to prove Catholicism was correct. In 1628 it was still necessary for the Protestant David Blondel to refute the forgeries.

Character of Some of the Popes

Should we join Pope Julius II, (The Warring Pope, 1504-1513) in his army, capturing, murdering, and looting in Italian cities to add to "God's Kingdom", i.e. the Papal States?

How bad were some Popes? According to Austin's Topical History of Christianity, p.148,

"Then [after 904] began the so-called "pornocracy," during which Theodora and her two daughters, Theodora the Younger and Marozia, virtually controlled Rome and the church itself. Enticing harlots, these women had sold their bodies for positions, titles, and land, giving them widespread power. Marozia had an illicit affair with Pope Sergius III, from which was born a son who later became Pope John XI. When Marozia sought to have herself crowned empress, her younger son Alberic kidnapped and imprisoned his mother, incarcerated his half brother, the pope, and became emperor himself. He reigned from 932 to 954, exercising absolute control over the papacy. After Alberic's death, his son Octavian was elected as Pope John XII, and proved to be the most odious member of this depraved family.

b. The Otto Regimes. In 962, the wicked John XII crowned the German king Otto I as emperor of the Holy Roman Emipire. Thinking he had an ally in depravity, John soon found the new emperor to be a man of character and devoted to restoring the papacy to decency and honor. When Otto assembled a synod to discuss deposing John, the pope threatened them all with excommunication, but they deposed him anyway. Three months later John called another synod which rescinded what Otto's synod had done. Therefore Otto decided upon force to rid the papacy of its evil ruler.

... The next forty-two years [after 1004] of papal history were filled with intense rivalry, expedient mediocrity, spiritual impotence, vice, and corruption. It seemed to reach its lowest depth with the election of a degenerate twelve-year-old boy, Pope Benedict IX (1032-1045) who after shameful debauchery and erratic administration, sold the holy tiara (i.e. office of the Pope) to the highest bidder. He was known as Gregory VI (1045-1046)....

http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/mm/mm01_10a.htm

Malleus Maleficarum Part 1

        Here we declare the truth as to whether and how witches transform men into beasts. And it is argued that this is not possible, from the following passage of Episcopus (XXVI, 5): Whoever believes that it is possible for any creature to be changed for the better or for the worse, or to be transformed into any other shape or likeness, except by the Creator Himself, Who made all things, is without doubt an infidel, and worse than a pagan.
        And we will quote the arguments of S. Thomas in the 2nd Book of Sentences, VIII: Whether devils can affect the bodily sense by the delusion of a glamour. There he argues first that they cannot. For though that shape of a beast which is seen must be somewhere, it cannot exist only in the senses; for the sense perceive no shape that is not received from actual matter, and there is no actual beast there; and he adduces the authority of the Canon. And again, that which seems to be, cannot really be; as in the case of a woman who seems to be a beast, for two substantial shapes cannot exist at one and the same time in the same matter. Therefore, since that shape of a beast which appears cannot exist anywhere, no glamour or illusion can exist in the eye of the beholder; for the sight must have some object in which it terminates.
        And if it is argued that the shape exists in the surrounding atmosphere, this is not possible; both because the atmosphere is not capable of taking any shape or form, and also because the air around that person is not always constant, and cannot be so on account of its fluid nature, especially when it is moved. And again because in that case such a transformation would be visible to everyone; but this is not so, because the devils seem to be unable to deceive the sight of Holy Men in the least.
        Besides, the sense of sight, or the faculty of vision, is a passive faculty, and every passive faculty is set in motion by the active agent that corresponds to it. Now the active agent corresponding to sight is twofold: one is the origin of the act, or the object; the other is the carrier, or medium. But that apparent shape cannot be the object of the sense, neither can it be the medium through which it is carried. First, it cannot be the object, since it cannot be taken hold of by anything, as was shown in the foregoing argument, since it does not exist in the senses received from an object, neither is it in the actual object, nor even in the air, as in a carrying medium, as was treated of above in the third argument.
        Besides, if the devil moves the inner consciousness, he does so either by projecting himself into the cognitive faculty, or by changing it. But he does not do so by projecting himself; for he would either have to assume a body, and even so could not penetrate into the inner organ of imagination; for two bodies cannot be at the same time in the same place; or he would assume a phantasmal body; and this again would be impossible, since no phantasm is quite without substance.
        Similarly also he cannot do it by changing the cognition. For he would either change it by alteration, which he does not seem able to do, since all alteration is caused by active qualities, in which the devils are lacking; or he would change it by transformation or local motion; and this does not seem feasible for two reasons. First, because a transformation or an organ cannot be effect without a sense of pain. Secondly, because in this case the devil would only make things of a known shape appear; but S. Augustine says that he creates shapes of this sort, both known and unknown. Therefore it seems that the devils can in no way deceive the imagination or senses of a man.
        But against this, S. Augustine says (de Ciuitate Dei, XVIII) that the transmutations of men into brute animals, said to be done by the art of devils, are not actual but only apparent. But this would not be possible if devils were not able to transmute the human senses. The authority of S. Augustine is again to the point in Book LXXXIII, which has already been quoted: This evil of the devil creeps in through all the sensual approaches, etc.
        Answer. If the reader wishes to refer to the method of transmutation, he will find in the Second Part of this work, chapter VI, various methods. But proceeding for the present in a scholastic manner, let us say in agreement with the opinions of the three Doctors, that the devil can deceive the human fancy so that a man really seems to be an animal. The last of those opinions, which is that of S. Thomas, is more subtle than the rest. But the first is that of S. Antoninus in the first part of his Summa, V, 5, where he declares that the devil at times works to deceive a man's fancy, especially by an illusion of the senses; and he proves this by natural reasoning, by the authority of the Canon, and by a great number of examples.
        And at first as follows: Our bodies naturally are subject to and obey the angelic nature as regards local motion. But the bad angels, although the have lost grace, have not lost their natural power, as has often been said before. And since the faculty of fancy or imagination is corporeal, that is, allied to a physical organ, it also is naturally subject to devils, so that they can transmute it, causing various phantasies, by the flow of the thoughts and perceptions to the original image received by them. So says S. Antoninus, and adds that it is proved by the following Canon (Episcopus, XXVI, 5): It must not be omitted that certain wicked women, perverted by Satan and seduced by the illusions and phantasms of devils, believe and profess that they ride in the night hours on certain beasts with Diana, the heathen goddess, or with Herodias, and with a countless number of women, and that in the untimely silence of night they travel over great distances of land. And later: Wherefore priests ought to preach to the people of God that they should know this to be altogether false, and that when such phantasms afflict the minds of the faithful, it is not of God, but of an evil spirit. For Satan himself transforms himself into the shape and likeness of different persons, and in dreams deluding the mind which he holds captive, leads it through devious ways.
        Indeed the meaning of this Canon has been treated of in the First Question, as to the four things which are to be preached. But it would be to misunderstand its meaning to maintain that witches cannot be so transported, when they wish and God does not prevent it; for very often men who are not witches are unwillingly transported bodily over great distances of land.
        But that these transmutations can be effected in both ways will be shown by the aforesaid Summa, and in the chapter where S. Augustine relates that it is read in the books of the Gentiles that a certain sorceress named Circe changed the companions of Ulysses into beasts; but that this was due to some glamour or illusion, rather than an actual accomplishment, by altering the fancies of men; and this is clearly proved by several examples.
        For we read in the Lives of the Fathers, that a certain girl would not consent to a young man who was begging her to commit a shameful act with him. And the young man, being angry because of this, caused a certain Jew to work a charm against her, by which she was changed into a filly. But this metamorphosis was not an actual fact, but an illusion of the devil, who changed the fancy and sense of the girl herself, and of those who looked at her, so that she seemed to be a filly, who was really a girl. For when she was led to the Blessed Macarius, the devil could not so work as to deceive his senses as he had those of other people, on account of his sanctity; for to him she seemed a true girl, not a filly. And at length by his prayer she was set free from that illusion, and it is said that this had happened to her because she did not give her mind to holy things, or attend the Sacraments as she ought; therefore the devil had power over her, although she was in other respects honest.
        Therefore the devil can, by moving the inner perceptions and humours, effect changes in the actions and faculties, physical, mental, and emotional, working by means of any physical organ soever; and this accords with S. Thomas, I, 91. And of this sort we may believe to have been the acts of Simon Magus in the incantations which are narrated of him. But the devil can do none of these things without the permission of God, Who with His good Angels often restrains the wickedness of him who seeks to deceive and hurt us. Wherefore S. Augustine, speaking of witches, says: These are they who, with the permission of God, stir up the elements, and confuse the minds of those who do not trust in God (XXVI, 5).
        Also devils can by witchcraft cause a man to be unable to see his wife rightly, and the converse. And this comes from an affectation of the fancy, so that she is represented to him as an odious and horrible thing. The devil also suggests representations of loathsome things to the fancy of both the waking and the sleeping, to deceive them and lead them to son. But because sin does not consist in the imagination but in the will, therefore man does not sin in these fancies suggested by the devil, and these various transformations, unless of his own will he consents to sin.
        The second opinion of the modern Doctors is to the same effect, when they declare what is glamour, and how many ways the devil can cause such illusions. Here we refer to what has already been said concerning the arguments of S. Antoninus, which there is no need to repeat.
        The third opinion is that of S. Thomas, and is an answer to the argument where it is asked, Wherein lies the existence of the shape of a beast that is seen; in the senses, or in reality, or in the surrounding air? And his opinion is that the apparent shape of a beast only exists in the inner perception, which, through the force of imagination, sees it in some way as an exterior object. And the devil has two ways of effecting such a result.
        In one way we may say that the forms of animals which are conserved in the treasury of the imagination pass by the operation of the devil into the organs of inner senses; and in this way it happens in dreams, as has been declared above. And so, when these forms are impressed on the organs of the outer senses, such as sight, they appear as if they were present as outer objects, and could actually be touched.
        The other way results from a change in the inner organs of perception, through which the judgement is deceived; as is shown in the case of him who has his taste corrupted, so that everything sweet seems bitter; and this is not very different from the first method. Moreover, even men can accomplish this by the virtue of certain natural things, as when in the vapour of a certain smoke the beams of a house appear to be serpents; and many other instances of this are found, as had been mentioned above.

        As to the first argument, that text is often quoted, but it is badly understood. For as to where it speaks of transformation into another shape or likeness, it has been made clear how this can be done by prestidigitatory art. And as to where it says that no creature can be made by the power of the devil, this is manifestly true if Made is understood to mean Created. But if the word Made is taken to refer to natural production, it is certain that devils can make some imperfect creatures. And S. Thomas shows how this may be done. For he says that all transmutations of bodily matters which can be effected by the forces of nature, in which the essential thing is the semen which is found in the elements of this world, on land or in the waters (as serpents and frogs and such things deposit their semen), can be effected by the work of devils who have acquired such semen. So also it is when anything is changed into serpents or frogs, which can be generated by putrefaction.
        But those transmutations of bodily matters which cannot be effected by the forces of nature can in no way be truly effected by the work of the devils. For when the body of a man is changed into the body of a beast, or a dead body is brought to life, such things only seem to happen, and are a glamour or illusion; or else the devil appears before men in an assumed body.
        These arguments are substantiated. For Blessed Albertus in his book On Animals, where he examines whether devils, or let us even say witches, can really make animals, says that they can, with God's permission, make imperfect animals. But they cannot do so in an instant, as God does, but by means of some motion, however sudden, as is clear in the case of witches. And touching the passage in Exodus vii, where Pharao called his wise men, he says: The devils run throughout the world and collect various germs, and by using them can evolve various species. And the gloss thereon says: When witches attempt to effect anything by the invocation of devils, they run about the world and bring the semen of those things which are in question, and by its means, with the permission of God, they produce new species. But this has been spoken of above.
        Another difficulty may arise, whether such devils' works are to be deemed miraculous. The answer was made clear in the preceding arguments, that even the devils can perform certain miracles to which their natural powers are adapted. And although such things are true in fact, they are not done with a view to the knowledge of the truth; and in this sense the works of Antichrist may be said to be deceptions, since they are done with a view to the seduction of men.
        The answer to the other argument, that concerning the shape, is also clear. The shape of a beast which is seen does not exist in the air, but only in the perception of the senses, as has been demonstrated above from the opinion of S. Thomas.
        For the argument that every passive is set in motion by its corresponding active, this is granted. But when it is inferred that the shape which is seen cannot be the original object which sets in motion the act of sight, since it arises from none of the sense, it is answered that it does not arise, since it originates from some sensible image conserved in the imagination, which the devil can draw out and present to the imagination or power of perception, as has been said above.
        For the last argument, it is to be said that the devil does not, as has been shown, change the perceptive and imaginative powers by projecting himself into them, but by transmuting them; not indeed by altering them, except in respect of local motion. For he cannot of himself induce new appearances, as has been said. But he changes them by transmutation, that is, local motion. And this again he does, not by dividing the substance of the organ of perception, since that would result in a sense of pain, but by a movement of the perceptions and humours.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/mm/mm01_08a.htm

Malleus Maleficarum Part 1

        Now the fact that adulterous drabs and whores are chiefly given to witchcraft is substantiated by the spells which are cast by witches upon the act of generation. And to make the truth more clear, we will consider the arguments of those who are in disagreement with us on this matter. And first it is argued that such a bewitching is not possible, because if it were it would apply equally to those who are married; and if this were conceded, then, since matrimony is God's work and witchcraft is the devil's, the devil's work would be stronger than God's. But if it is allowed that it can only affect fornicators and the unmarried, this involves a return to the opinion that witchcraft does not really exist, but only in men's imagination; and this was refuted in the First Question. Or else some reason will be found why it should affect the unmarried and not the married; and the only possible reason is that matrimony is God's work. And since, according to the Theologians, this reason is not valid, there still remains the argument that it would make the devil's work stronger than God's; and since it would be unseemly to make such an assertion, it is also unseemly to maintain that the venereal act can be obstructed by witchcraft.
        Again, the devil cannot obstruct the other natural actions, such as eating, walking and standing, as is apparent from the fact that, if he could, he could destroy the whole world.
        Besides, since the venereal act is common to all women, if it were obstructed it would be so with reference to all women; but this is not so, and therefore the first argument is good. For the facts prove that it is not so; for when a man says that he has been bewitched, he is still quite capable as regards other women, though not with her with whom he is unable to copulate; and the reason for this is that he does not wish to, and therefore cannot effect anything in the matter.
        On the contrary and true side is the chapter in the Decretals (If by sortilege, etc.): as is also the opinion of all the Theologians and Canonists, where they treat of the obstruction to marriage caused by witchcraft.
        There is also another reason: that since the devil is more powerful than man, and a man can obstruct the generative powers by means of frigid herbs or anything else that can be thought of, therefore much more can the devil do this, since he has greater knowledge and cunning.
        Answer. The truth is sufficiently evident from two matters which have already been argued, although the method of obstruction has not been specifically declared. For it has been shown that witchcraft does not exist only in men's imaginations, and not in fact; but that truly and actually in numerable bewitchments can happen, with the permission of God. It has been shown, too, that God permits it more in the case of the generative powers, because of their greater corruption, than in the case of other human actions. But concerning the method by which such obstruction is procured, it is to be noted that it does not affect only the generative powers, but also the powers of the imagination or fancy.
        And as to this, Peter of Palude (III, 34) notes five methods. For he says that the devil, being a spirit, has power over a corporeal creature to cause or prevent a local motion. Therefore he can prevent bodies from approaching each other, either directly or indirectly, by interposing himself in some bodily shape. In this way it happened to the young man who was betrothed to an idol and nevertheless married a young maiden, and was consequently unable to copulate with her. Secondly, he can excite a man to that act, or freeze his desire for it, by the virtue of secret things of which he best knows the power. Thirdly, he can also disturb a man's perception and imagination as to make the woman appear loathsome to him: since he can, as had been said, influence the imagination. Fourthly, he can directly prevent the erection of that member which is adapted to fructification, just as he can prevent local motion. Fifthly, he can prevent the flow of the vital essence to the members in which lie the motive power; by closing as it were the seminary ducts, so that it does not descend to the generative channels, or falls back from them, or does not project from them, or in any of many ways fails in its function.
        And he continues in agreement with what has been treated of above by other Doctors. For God allows the devil more latitude in respect of this act, through which sin was first spread abroad, than of other human acts. Similarly, serpents are more subject to magic spells than are other animals. And a little later he says: It is the same in the case of a woman, for the devil can so darken her understanding that she considers her husband so loathsome that not for all the world would she allow him to lie with her.
        Later he wishes to find the reason why more men than women are bewitched in respect of that action; and he says that such obstruction generally occurs in the matter of erection, which can more easily happen to men; and therefore more men than women are bewitched. It might also be said that, the greater part of witches being women, they lust more for men than for women. Also they act in the despite of married women, finding every opportunity for adultery when the husband is able to copulate with other women but not with his own wife; and similarly the wife also has to seek other lovers.
        He adds also that God allows the devil to afflict sinners more bitterly than the just. Wherefore the Angel said to Tobias: He gives the devil power over those who are given up to lust. But he has power also against the just sometimes, as in the case of Job, but not in respect of the genital functions. Wherefore they ought to devote themselves to confession and other good works, lest the iron remain in the wound, and it be in vain to apply remedies. So much for Peter. But the method of removing such effects will be shown in the Second Part of this work.

        But incidentally, if it is asked why this function is sometimes obstructed in respect of one woman but not of another, the answer, according to S. Bonaventura, is this. Either the enchantress of witch afflicts in this way those persons upon whom the devil has determined; or it is because God will not permit it to be inflicted on certain persons. For the hidden purpose of God in this is obscure, as is shown in the case of the wife of Tobias. And he adds:
        If it is asked how the devil does this, it is to be said that he obstructs the genital power, not intrinsically by harming the organ, but extrinsically by rendering it useless. Therefore, since it is an artificial and not a natural obstruction, he can make a man impotent towards one woman but not towards others: by taking away the inflammation of his lust for her, but not for other women, either through his own power, or through some herb or stone, or some occult natural means. And this agrees with the words of Peter of Palude.
        Besides, since impotency in this act is sometimes due to coldness of nature, or some natural defect, it is asked how it is possible to distinguish whether it is due to witchcraft of not. Hostiensis gives the answer in his Summa (but this must not be publicly preached): When the member is in no way stirred, and can never perform the act of coition, this is a sign of frigidity of nature; but when it is stirred and becomes erect, but yet cannot perform, it is a sign of witchcraft.
        It is to be noted also that impotence of the member to perform the act is not the only bewitchment; but sometimes the woman is caused to be unable to conceive, or else she miscarries.
        Note, moreover, that according to what is aid down by the Canons, whoever through desire of vengeance or for hatred does anything to a man or a woman to prevent them from begetting or conceiving must be considered a homicide. And note, further, that the Canon speaks of loose lovers who, to save their mistresses from shame, use contraceptives, such as potions, or herbs that contravene nature, without any help from devils. And such penitents are to be punished as homicides. But witches who do such things by witchcraft are by law punishable by the extreme penalty, as had been touched on above in the First Question.
        And for a solution of the arguments; when it is objected that these things cannot happen to those joined together in matrimony, it is further to be noted that, even if the truth in this matter had not already been made sufficiently plain, yet these things can truly and actually happen just as much to those who are married as to those who are not. And the prudent reader who has plenty of books, will refer to the Theologians and the Canonists, especially where they speak of the impotent and bewitched. He will find them in agreement in condemning two errors: especially with regard to married people who seem to think that such bewitchment cannot happen to those who are joined in matrimony, advancing the reason that the devil cannot destroy the works of God.
        And the first error which they condemn is that of those who say that there is no witchcraft in the world, but only in the imagination of men who, through their ignorance of hidden causes which no man yet understands, ascribe certain natural effects to witchcraft, as though they were effected not by hidden causes, but by devils working either by themselves or in conjunction with witches. And although all other Doctors condemn this error as a pure falsehood, yet S. Thomas impugns it more vigorously and stigmatizes it as actual heresy, saying that this error proceeds from the root of infidelity. And since infidelity in a Christian is accounted heresy, therefore such deserve to be suspected as heretics. And this matter was touched on in the First Question, though it was not there declared so plainly. For if anyone considers the other sayings of S. Thomas in other places, he will find the reasons why he affirms that such an error proceeds from the root of infidelity.
        For in his questions concerning Sin, where he treats of devils, and in his first question, whether devils have bodies that naturally belong to them, among many other matters he makes mention of those who referred every physical effect to the virtue of the stars; to which they said that the hidden causes of terrestrial effects were subject. And he says: It must be considered that the Peripatetics, the followers of Aristotle, held that devils did not really exist; but that those things which are attributed to devils proceeded from the power of the stars and other natural phenomena. Wherefore S. Augustine says (de Ciuitate Dei, X), that it was the opinion of Porphyry that from herbs and animals, and certain sounds and voice, and from figures and figments observed in the motion of the stars, powers corresponding to the stars were fabricated on earth by men in order to explain various natural effect. And the error of these is plain, since they referred everything to hidden causes in the stars, holding that devils were only fabricated by the imagination of men.
        But this opinion is clearly proved to be false by S. Thomas in the same work; for some works of devils are found which can in no way proceed from any natural cause. For example, when one who is possessed by devil speaks in an unknown language; and many other devil's works are found, both in the Rhapsodic and the Necromantic arts, which can in no way proceed except from some Intelligence, which may be naturally good but is evil in its intention. And therefore, because of these incongruities, other Philosophers were compelled to admit that there were devils. Yet they afterwards fell into various errors, some thinking that the souls of men, when they left their bodies, became devils. For this reason many Soothsayers have killed children, that they might have their souls as their co-operators; and many other errors are recounted.
        From this it is clear that not without reason does the Holy Doctor say that such an opinion proceeds from the root of infidelity. And anyone who wishes may read S. Augustine (de Ciuitate Dei, VIII, IX) on the various errors of infidels concerning the nature of devils. And indeed the common opinion of all Doctors, quoted in the above-mentioned work, against those who err in this way by denying that there are any witches, is very weighty in its meaning, even if it is expressed in few words. For they say that they who maintain that there is no witchcraft in the world go contrary to the opinion of all the Doctors, and of the Holy Scripture; and declare that there are devils, and that devils have power over the bodies and imaginations of men, with the permission of God. Wherefore, those who are the instruments of the devils, at whose instance the devil at times do mischief to a creature, they call witches.
        Now in the Doctor's condemnation of this first error nothing is said concerning those joined together in matrimony; but this is made clear in their condemnation of the second error of believing that, though witchcraft exists and abounds in the world, even against carnal copulation, yet, since no such bewitchment can be considered to be permanent, it never annuls a marriage that has already been contracted. Here is where they speak of those joined in matrimony. Now in refuting this error (for we do so, even though it is little to the point, for the sake of those who have not many books), it is to be noted that they refute it by maintaining that it is against all precedent, and contrary to all laws both ancient and modern.
        Wherefore the Catholic Doctors make the following distinction, that impotence caused by witchcraft is either temporary or permanent. And if it is temporary, then it does not annul the marriage. Moreover, it is presumed to be temporary of they are able to healed of the impediment within three years from their cohabitation, having taken all possible pain, either through the sacraments of the Church, or through other remedies, to be cured. But if they are not then cured by any remedy, from that time it is presumed to be permanent. And in that case it either precedes both the contracting of a marriage, and annuls one that is not yet contracted; or else it follows the contract of marriage but precedes its consummation, and then also, according to some, it annuls the previous contract. (For it is said in Book XXXII, quest. 1. cap. 1 that the confirmation of a marriage consists in its carnal office.) Or else it is subsequent to the consummation of the marriage, and then the matrimonial bond is not annulled. Much is noted there concerning impotence by Hostiensis, and Godfrey, and the Doctors and Theologians.
        To the arguments. As to the first, it is made sufficiently clear from what has been said. For as to the argument that God's works can be destroyed by the devil's works, if witchcraft has power against those who are married, it has no force; rather does the opposite appear, since the devil can do nothing without God's permission. For he does not destroy by main force like a tyrant, but through some extrinsic art, as is proved above. And the second argument is also made quite clear, why God allows this obstruction more in the case of the venereal act than of other acts. But the devil has power also over other acts, when God permits. Wherefore it is not sound to argue that he could destroy the whole world. And the third objection is similarly answered by what has been said.

November 1, 1478 Papal Bull Exigit Sincere Devotionis by Pope Sixtus IV to start the Spanish Inquisition

This bull was done at the request of Ferdinand and Isabella. The Spanish Inquisition lasted until 1834.

Quote from http://www.geocities.com/iberianinquisition/: To simply say that Catholics have sinned is to sidestep the most important aspect of these sins. What remains important about the Inquisition (and the forceable conversions of native peoples in the New World) is the involvement of the church's authority with these sins.

July 12, 1555 Papal Bull Cum nimis absurdum by Pope Paul IV Against the Jews

1. . . . in all future times in this city [Rome], as in all other cities, holdings, and territories belonging to the Roman Church, all Jews are to live solely in one and the same location, or if that is not possible, in two or three or as many as are necessary, which are to be contiguous and separated completely from the dwellings of Christians. . . . And they are to have only one entry, and so too one exit.

2. . . . [the Jews] may have only one synagogue in its customary location, and they may construct no new synagogue. Nor may they possess any real property. Accordingly, they must demolish and destroy all their [other] synagogues except for this one alone. The real property which they now possess, they must sell to Christians within a period of time. . . .

3. And so that they be identified everywhere as Jews, men and women are respectively required and bound to wear in full view a hat or some obvious marking, both to be blue in color, in such a way that they may not be concealed or hidden. . . .

4. [And they shall not] have nurses or serving women or any other Christians serving them, of whatever sex. Nor shall they have their children wet-nursed or reared by Christian women.

5. Nor may they themselves or anyone in their employ labor in public on Sundays or other feast days declared by the Church. . . .

6.?

7. Nor may they be so presumptuous as to entertain or dine with Christians or to develop close relations and friendships with them.

8. Nor may they use in the ledgers and account books which they have with Christians . . . any other alphabet than the Latin one or any other language than everyday Italian. If they do otherwise, these books will have no value [when brought as testimony in court] against Christians [who have defaulted on repayment].

9. Additionally, these Jews may carry on no business as purveyors of grain, barley, or other items necessary for human sustenance, but must be limited [in this sphere] to dealing only in second-hand clothing.

10. As for those among them [the Jews] who are physicians, even if they are summoned and requested, they may not come forth and attend to the care of Christians.

From Manfred R. Lehmann's website (http://www.manfredlehmann.com/news/news_detail.cgi/23/0)

The Infamous Anti-Jewish Papal Bulls

Excerpt from a Papal Bull of Pope Paul III, 1542: "It is our desire that the Jews be converted to the Catholic faith. The Church must keep those Jews who have converted (called neophytes) far away from members of their former religion, lest they regress to their original pernicious practices. Clerics are urged to arrange marriages for the neophytes with Christians by birth." (Note: This is also the strategy of "Jews for Jesus" and other missionary groups - grab a Jew, fix him up with a Christian girl, and encourage them to marry so that their children are sure to be lost to the Jewish people forever.)

"If neophytes fail to correct themselves following a priestly admonition, and are discovered to be living as Jews and to have returned to their vomit, then the clerics should proceed against them in accord with the regulations of the Sacred Law, just as against perfidious heretics." Expert from a Papal Bull by Pope Paul IV (1555-59), forcing the Jews into Ghettos: "There can exist nothing more absurd and unseemly than the Jews. As long as they persist in their errors, as a result of their behavior they are servants, while Christians are free men. All their synagogues are to be destroyed except one. They should wear a badge of yellow color. From now on, and for all times, their quarters must be separated from Christians."

Expert from a papal Bull by Pope Pius V, in 1566: "The Hebrew race merits to be cast down head first. Its priesthood is lost, its laws stripped of their authority. It is driven asunder from its land, to wander through the world for so many generations, hated, the object of opprobrium. They are given to soothsaying, incantations, magic, superstition and evil practices, therefore, we decree that every Jew must depart from our Republic within three months, and that their goods become the property of the Roman Church."

Pope Clement VIII, 1593: "The vile and obdurate perfidy of the Hebrews does not even acknowledge the great mercy of the Holy Mother Church that has patiently awaited their conversion. But we now believe that such a nation must be totally expelled from the midst of the majority of our population. But in order that they not be driven too far from the path of salvation promised to the remnant of Israel, but to such closer states where they can be readily restrained, they must be enticed from their mental darkness to an acknowledgement of the true faith of the Holy Roman Church. Any Jew found here after this decree has gone into effect shall be punished by condemning him to the slave ship for as long as he shall live."

Excerpt from the Bull against the Talmud by Pope Clement VIII: "We Christians must not overlook the Jews' wickedness. We decree and condemn that godless work known as the Talmud, and other similar rejected and detestable writings and books. We forbid in all perpetuity all Jews, communities and individuals, from daring in any way to read, possess, buy, sell or publish any books or codices of the godless and often censured Talmud, and those other utterly worthless, cabalistic and abominable books that are forbidden and condemned, as well as any commentaries, treaties and writings in the Hebrew languages which are lewd and obscene works. Anybody, Jew or non-Jew, possessing any of such books must deliver them to Rome within ten days to the office of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition, the books to be burned. Anybody violating this decree is subject to confiscation of all goods and bodily torture."

Anti-Jewish Edicts Have Never Been Withdrawn

None of these outrageous and hate-crazed rantings against Jews, Judaism and our literature, have ever been rescinded or cancelled. When I inquired with the National Conference of Catholic Bishops about this unacceptable situation, which totally violates the tenets and spirit of the "Nostra Aetate" of 25 years ago, I received an answer from Dr. Eugene Fisher, the public relations spokesman for the Catholics: "There is no need for an 'official annulment and withdrawal' of the anti-Jewish Church legislation of previous ages. That has already been officially accomplished by the Second Vatican Council." This answer flies in the face of what happens when the Vatican really wants to atone for past errors - as in the case of Galileo. There, 13 years of investigation was carried out, leading to the official retraction. I repeat the question: Do we not deserve the same consideration as Galileo?

Vatican Council II

On the subject of the Second Vatican Council, raised by the good Dr. Fisher, I recommend the reading of the day-to-day account of what happened during that 4-1/2 year process, from June 1962 until December 1965. The declaration "On the Jews and Non-Christians" led to anti-Semitic attacks on the crudest sort by many Cardinals, and excruciating and agonizing discussions, with compromise after compromise necessary until a consensus could be reached. A large portion of the "Church Princes" meetings in Rome were simply unable to force themselves to say anything exonerating the Jews. To them, the Jews must remain forever condemned, and the Church's single-minded purpose must remain to force them into conversion.

Any reference to past persecutions and massacres of Jews by the Church was met by stunned objections, and in the end, the sponsors of the Declaration were defeated. They could not even get approval for identifying the hundreds of years of crimes against the Jews, including the Church's role and silence during the Holocaust, as "persecution" (Latin: persecutio). They had to settle for the meaningless expression "harassment" (Latin: vexatio), and for including the condemnation of anti-Semitism together with condemnation of all "injustices."

The final Declaration, therefore, is a greatly watered-down document, which cannot by any means give Jews full satisfaction, especially as it strongly alludes to a call for conversion of all Jews: "Just as the Church repudiated all injustices inflicted on any man, so she likewise deplores and condemns hatred and harassment of the Jews. The union of the Jewish people with the Church is a part of the Christian hope. Indeed, the Church awaits the entrance of this people into the fullness of the people of G-d established by Christ." (Mind you, we Jews are called "this people," and the Christians are called "the people of G-d.")

For more info please contact Christian Debater™ P.O. Box 144441 Austin, TX 78714 www.BibleQuery.org