[malakhi]

Careful now, if you protest too much they'll start calling you a "proddie" too.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

I know we're talking ancient (well, medieval ;o) history here, but I cannot imagine the chutzpah it takes to make such a statement.

Catholics, c'mon, what do you really think of this? Surely you don't accept the relationship between civil and religious authority advocated here? Do you think we all must be subject to the Roman Pontiff on threat of eternal damnation? Do you, personally, accept the notion of extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

[Iowegian]

I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

Yes you do. I don't always like it or agree with it, but I appreciate it and respect you for it.

[Iowegian]

Do you think we all must be subject to the Roman Pontiff on threat of eternal damnation? Do you, personally, accept the notion of extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

I've raised this issue a couple of times here and got no response from our catholic friends. No attempt to explain it or justify it. Only silence.

[RobbyS]

Surely you don't accept the relationship between civil and religious authority advocated here? Do you think we all must be subject to the Roman Pontiff on threat of eternal damnation? Do you, personally, accept the notion of extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

Do you prefer the Erastian view? As Judge Noonan has pointed out, our law requires religious authority to submit to the civil authority, even to the point of denying moral doctrines, should the "greater good" of the state come into play. Look how the United States treated the Mormons. Look at the abortion and the suppression of efficacious action against abortion practioners. As to the question of extra ecclesiam... that doesn't come into consideration here. We are dealing with a medieval polity in which church membership and citizenship are identical.