Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: annalex

Don’t prattle about deception when your church purports to represent an unbroken line of Apostolic succession despite centuries of disputed, corrupt papacy, sometimes three competing popes at a time.

Their own hidebound, bureaucratic myopia made the Reformation inevitable. There have been Reformers on record since at least the eighth century, easily dismissed as “heretic” until critical mass was reached in the sixteenth century.

Why, do you suppose, was that critical mass reached? Was it something in the water? Or did the utter corruption of the hierarchy, from Rome to the local level across Europe and the British Isles, have something to do with it?

You should know the answer to this. But, drag out the megaphone and cheer for your team. Rah rah rah.


25 posted on 06/16/2010 6:19:44 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: RegulatorCountry

Dispute about succession is not the same as absence fo valid apostolic succession. While there were false popes, there has always been a valid pope. Besides, apostolic succession is not only through popes but also through bishops, and to priests.

Yes, there were bad clergy all along. Nor were St. Peter and the Holy Apostles themselves perfect, as the Scripture shows.

None of the imperfections of the Living Church is a lie about the scripture. The so-called Reformation is. That is the difference you don’t seem to grasp.


26 posted on 06/17/2010 5:16:14 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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