[OLD REGGIE]

And was/is that always a good thing? Take a look at the internet. Any nutcase with a computer can publish, for the whole world to see, anything they want. It doesn't matter how factual their material is because there are no editors nor hardly any oversight. At the time, the printing press was comperable to the internet in its technological impact.
------------------------------------------------------------

You are so right. The world went to hell in a hand-basket as soon as the RCC lost the ability to decide what we could read or write.

Those who describe a period of history known as the "Dark Ages" are liars and should be censored. The real truth is it was a glorious period for mankind.

[JHavard]

As I was slushing through the "The New Advent" site, I just happened to run across this ditty on the Roman Claim that proves that they are within their rights to claim them selves as successors of the apostles, this makes it official.

ROMAN CLAIM

The principle underlying the Roman claim is contained in the idea of succession. "To succeed" is to be the successor of, especially to be the heir of, or to occupy an official position just after, as Victoria succeeded William IV. Now the Roman Pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position, and perform the functions of St. Peter; they are, therefore, his successors.

We must prove that St. Peter came to Rome, and ended there his pontificate;

We must prove that the Bishops of Rome who came after him held his official position in the Church.

As soon as the problem of St. Peter's coming to Rome passed from theologians writing pro domo suâ into the hands of unprejudiced historians, i.e. within the last half century, it received a solution which no scholar now dares to contradict;

Well, that does it for me, this proves beyond a shadow of doubt that Peter was in Rome, and the RCC's simply succedded him, case close."It's in their book"