Posted on 05/16/2008 3:19:30 PM PDT by netmilsmom
Late Antiquity
Economic Effects of the Barbarian Invasions
The Germanic tribes were not nomads, they were farmers. As they moved into the Empire, they brought with them their own farming techniques, including a new type of plow well-suited for farming the heavy northern soils. They brought also their own style of land-holding, settlement patterns, and diet. Once they had fought their battles and won their land, they pretty much settled down to being farmers and lords of great estates.
They were new lords, of course, so there was a certain amount of displacement of the existing landowners. As I’ve already noted, at the lowest levels what we see is a slow but steady change from a countryside populated by slaves to one populated by peasants and serfs. The landowners themselves gradually inter-married, so that there was less and less distinction between the Romans and the Germans.
The barbarians affected the cities of the Empire only slightly. They might sack a town, and the immediate effect was traumatic, but the town existed for certain reasons, and the coming of the Germans did not change those reasons. Some towns were administrative centers, others trade or manufacturing. The need for trade and manufacture might decline, but it still existed. The administrative centers collapsed more quickly, but this had more to do with Imperial politics than with the movement of tribes. Most towns recovered quickly after being looted; indeed, certain town were looted many times over, attesting to their continued ability to generate wealth.
http://history.boisestate.edu/westciv/fallrome/12.shtml
Dr. Eckleburg to Petronski
No church uses the "Institutes of the Christian Religion" as dogma of its faith.
It's one book written by one man.
Unlike the catechism of the RCC which all Catholics are required to believe.
And as pointed out, the RCC catechism is over 200 pages longer than the Bible itself.
Sounds funnier every time I type it.
Get the difference?
Is there no difference?
Why the distinction if there is no difference?
God "distinguished" between the two.
The Divine Essence encompasses three Persons, One of Whom promised to share what the Father gave Him with us.
"Sharing" is not the same thing as becoming "a god."
As soon as Jesus heard the word that was spoken, he saith unto the ruler of the synagogue, Be not afraid, only believe. And he suffered no man to follow him, save Peter, and James, and John the brother of James. And he cometh to the house of the ruler of the synagogue, and seeth the tumult, and them that wept and wailed greatly. And when he was come in, he saith unto them, Why make ye this ado, and weep? the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn. But when he had put them all out, he taketh the father and the mother of the damsel, and them that were with him, and entereth in where the damsel was lying. And he took the damsel by the hand, and said unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, arise. And straightway the damsel arose, and walked; for she was of the age of twelve years. And they were astonished with a great astonishment." -- Mark 35-42While he (Jesus) yet spake, there came from the ruler of the synagogue's house certain which said, Thy daughter is dead: why troublest thou the Master any further?
The father thought his daughter was dead. Christ told him not to be afraid, but to believe in Him. And his daughter lived.
Faith works miracles. Dead men rise to the living. Fallen sinners are acquitted. All this in the context of these preceding verses...
And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague." -- Mark 5:33-34"But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.
Seems to be a definite theme here.
Do you see it differently, Petronski?
Got it. When you agree with Calvin, et al, they are “authoritative,” when you don’t they are just “one man.”
Apparently it IS possible to be more Calvinist than Calvin (or at least to aspire to be...).
Have you ever noticed that Calvin is ONLY wrong on matters of anti-Catholic bigotry?
And the number of pages means what???? Nothing.
Read the post it was posted to. Protestants are the ones who seem to have a problem with the number of pages.
I will tell it to all of you who insist that baptism, Mary and the Eucharist will get you into heaven.
Complete non-sequitur. This is about the ridiculous dispute over the number of pages in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I say there are precisely as many pages as are necessary.
It was your Protestant brethren who think too much scholarship is bad. Wagglebee and I merely pointed out that, if that is the case, Cauvin must be very naughty indeed, having 400 more pages than the Catechism.
Reading makes mouths tired (and grammar causes dizziness)!
Above all, like this old geezer, admit you know nothing.
Leave the bloviating to the bloviators.
Let’s see now, this Douay-Rheims Bible is just over 1500 pages (though there are maps and other commentaries).
http://www.catholiccompany.com/catholic-books/1001875/Douay-Rheims-Bible-Black-Leather-Cover/?category=465
Also, let’s not forget that Protestants SHORTENED their Bible.
But the reality is that unless two books are printed on the same size paper, with identical fonts, font sizing, line spacing and margins, the “length” of the book is meaningless. And as has been noted, it doesn’t matter in the first place, a book is as long as it needs to be and, as is the case with the Catechism, footnotes eat up a lot of space.
It’s all an exercise in anti-intellectualism anyway. Ridiculous.
1. Clicked on your link.
2. Clicked on the Catechism link.
3. Put 460 in the search string.
4. Here's what was returned:
460 The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine nature":"For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God." "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."
Footnotes?
Click “» Enter the CCC at this paragraph” to get to the actual Catechism.
>>Footnotes? <<
Well, what do you know!!!! Where I looked it had footnote numbers. And let me tell you I’ve seen lots of copies of the CCC. Guess that’s why I use Vatican.va.
Had someone posted this without a link, I would have surely questioned it. Which is a great lesson in linking to your sources!
It’s so easy to just go to the top of the browser, double click the address (it will turn color), hit Ctrl+C, put your cursor on the dialog box and hit Ctrl+V.
Ta-da, source linked!!!!
What did I say? "It would perhaps be more forthcoming if you stated in the very beginning that you are a professional Catholic Apologist without one ounce of objectivity."
professional (small case "p") does not, to my knowledge, iindicate "paid". If you misunderstood me so be it. There is still no excuse to invent quotations in my name.
While we are at it I have asked you several times to defend what I consider a "hit and run" falsehood you posted. Care to answer it?
"I think it is more that it is amazing the confusion that has been caused by the thousands of quarelling Protestant groups, none of which, Doctrinally and Theologically agree on anything."
. As one of the Church Fathers stated (off the top of my head, I think it was St. Cyprian of Carthage, and I am paraphrasing), “the person who wants God as his Father can’t fully do so without the Church as his Mother”
And Jesus said:
Matthew 22:
[37] And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.
[38] This is the great and first commandment.
I fully understand why most of your references are to Church Fathers rather than to Scripture.
Regards old Reggie and I am hoping you will be like the Prodigal son and return home before you pass one.
Pass one what? Some years ago I passed gall stones on a regular basis until one was too large to pass. This unfortunate event made me quite ill with pancreatitis and a "sick" liver. That problem was solved with the removal of my gall bladder.
I have never passed a kidney stone. Is that what you mean?
In all seriousness I don't believe God cares one whit which "church" you belong to. He cares only that you love Him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.