The protestants had no need to declare themselves sole guard of faith, unlike the corrupt Pope who delared himself free from error in faith and morals, after he lost his temporal power over the Papal States. (having proven him self not free from error in miltary matters)
Blah blah blah blah.
Ya know, given that this is the religion forum, maybe I should explain myself:
You’ll note my comments were specifically about Mormonism. I wasn’t hijacking a thread. I cast no aspersions as to why Protestants in general ceased their attention to Mary. I simply noted an historical trend which could account for Mormonism changing “mother of God.” You come in with blather about “the corrupt pope” this and irrelevant military issues that. (Yeah, the big failure of the papacy militarily was it decided to counterattack the Islamic invasion).
You know what? There is a brain-addled public-screwel education moron who hasn’t heard that a billion times. It’s drilled into every child as part of their American indoctrination. So did you really feel you were adding anything to the conversation by bringing it up? Or was this just a knee-jerk response: “Someone said something about Catholicism... I have to bad-mouth the papacy!!!!”?
So that’s why the “blah blah blah blah” comment... I’ve heard it a billion times from every brand of Protestant, atheist, liberal, non-Catholic conservative, communist, Democrat, freemason, school teacher, news commentator, columnist, talk head, blah, blah, blah.
If you knew anything about religion, you would realize that it was Jesus,not a corrupt Pope,who originated infallibility...He gave to Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven...whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven...I will be with you from now until the end of time. Why would Christ want to be associated with an error prone organization?...The Popes seldom speak Ex Cathedra, that is without error, but when they do...it is without error. Find one example refuting that statement, and the entire infallibility question is moot.
Using that logic, it is safe to say the Jews had no need to declare the God of Israel the true god, and their faith was truth compared to the pagan religions of her neighbors?
It is also correct to say that Paul had no need (or no authority) to declare anything about the truth of Christ, faith, truth, morality, death, heaven, hell, sin, redemption, and salvation?