Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Antoninus
You misqoute me and you contradict yourself.

I said The Eastern Christians actually had a seperation of church and state but they never called it that. I think the term the Orthodox use is a "symphonic relationship".

The Emperor was not head of church and state.

Your contradictory statement The Pope never claimed to have temporal authority over all of the former Western Empire and his attempts to depose western kings were not always successful. If the Pope never claimed temporal authority why did he crown Charles the Great? Why did give England to William the Bastard? Why did the Pope give Ireland to the Norman English (that's right my Irish Catholic pals--the Pope gave you over without even a by your leave).

As chronicled here: THE FALL OF ORTHODOX ENGLAND

Gives a god account of the symphonic relationship between the church and state in Orthodoxy too.

255 posted on 05/31/2003 5:52:41 PM PDT by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorisim by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies ]


To: Destro
You misqoute me and you contradict yourself.

Please point out where I misquote you.

I said The Eastern Christians actually had a seperation of church and state but they never called it that. I think the term the Orthodox use is a "symphonic relationship".

They may have had in theory, but in practice, such separation did not exist, no matter what they called it.

The Emperor was not head of church and state.

Effectively, he was.

If the Pope never claimed temporal authority why did he crown Charles the Great? Why did give England to William the Bastard? Why did the Pope give Ireland to the Norman English.

I don't think you understand the difference between temporal and spiritual power; power in theory and power in reality. Most of the temporal acts of Popes you site above were mere confirmation of fait accomplis. What was Stalin's line? "How many divisions does the Pope have?" The Pope's power was limited utterly by exactly how "Christian" a king he was dealing with.

Of course, all the thrones of all those kings (and Stalin's dictatorship too) are long gone, yet the Pope still remains as one of the most important men on the planet. Says something, don't you think?

As chronicled here: THE FALL OF ORTHODOX ENGLAND

I don't read much fiction...
262 posted on 05/31/2003 6:42:04 PM PDT by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson