I understand your point. I simply do not believe it to be valid. During the period in question, the RC Church did not have large armies at its disposal. It relied on secular powers to take heed of its views. In France, Louis, a loyal Catholic hated the concept of religious toleration. The RC Church, at this time, were also opposed to this principle (one that has become so widely accepted in 'western' societies that it is often difficult to imagine a time before). Louis, with the tactic support of leading Churchman, ordered acts of anti-Protestant terror. (Let's be completely honest, without the tactic approval of the Church, would a devout Catholic have been committed to such a course of action?) Some leading Churchman celebrated the outcome - a France almost completely 'cleansed' of Protestants. Now, in all the material the criticism of the RC Church is so obviously implied that this shouldn't need re-emphasising. A modern historian would not write: "The following is a criticism of the RC Church..." That is how junior school children begin their English composition answers!