Posted on 06/18/2007 12:22:11 PM PDT by TexConfederate1861
If you are a Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk of the Catholic Church, in the year 1517.
If you belong to the Church of England, your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the Pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to re-marry.
If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded by John Knox in Scotland in the year 1560.
If you are a Congregationalist, your religion was originated by Robert Brown in Holland in 1582.
If you are Protestant Episcopalian, your religion was an offshoot of the Church of England, founded by Samuel Senbury in the American colonies in the 17th century.
If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1606.
If you are of the Dutch Reformed Church, you recognize Mic helis Jones as founder because he originated your religion in New York in 1628.
If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1774.
If you are a Mormon (Latter Day Saints), Joseph Smith started your religion in Palmyra, New York, in 1829.
If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.
If you are Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year in which your religion was born and to Mary Baker Eddy as its founder.
If you belong to one of the religious organizations known as "Church of the Nazarene, Pentecostal Gospel," "Holiness Church," or "Jehovah's Witnesses," your religion is one of the hundreds of new sects founded by men within the past hundred years.
If you are Roman Catholic, your church shared the same rich apostolic and doctrinal heritage as the Orthodox Church for the first thousand years of its history, since during the first millennium they were one and the same Church. Lamentably, in 1054, the Pope of Rome broke away from the other four Apostolic Patriarchates (which include Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), by tampering with the Original Creed of the Church, and considering himself to be infallible. Thus your church is 1,000 years old.
If you are Orthodox Christian, your religion was founded in the year 33 by Jesus Christ, the Son of God. It has not changed since that time. Our church is now almost 2,000 years old. And it is for this reason, that Orthodoxy, the Church of the Apostles and the Fathers is considered the true "one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church."
This is the greatest legacy that we can pass on to the young people of the new millennium.
No humor there, just a recognition that there has been some post - reformation improvement in the Papacy.
Yes, I'm a supporter of our Lord Protector Cromwell.
Oh, oh.
Does this mean that Tony Blair needs to be excommunicated?
Since the restoration, the CoE hasn’t subscribed to the standards. Besides, rumor has it that he’s a closet Catholic these days anyway.
His Majesty, King Charles I was too nice.
I would have had Cromwell’s Head on a pike on Traitor’s Gate.
So I hear.
I also hear that he’s coming out of that closet shortly.
Generally when they decided to become Priests.
It appears it was well after each became a prince of the church.
I'd encourage you to find proof of this from some source other than the incestuous writing of historians quoting each others books. Historians who have studied the original sources tend to not support the wild charges thrown about.
Ha, ha! Good retort.
So before the the mistresses and nepotism.
But if he'd been an able king, the protectorate wouldn't have been needed.
That wouldn't surprise me after he leaves office.
How about Lorenzo De Medici, who called Rome "that sink of all iniquity". How old was his son (the future Pope Leo) when he made Cardinal? 14?
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/lorenzomed1.html
As for Alexander VI, I take it you disagree with the Catholic Encyclopedia. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01289a.htm
You obviously believe the New Testament, and the Authorship of THOSE books are dubious, yet accepted. The Oral Teachings are no different, and I have seen no writings of the Early Church fathers that confict in any way at all.
He was able, and a good Christian, just not disposed to making deals.
Sounds like King David's bio, and I think God chose him. God works in mysterious ways, whether these particular incidents are facts or not.
They were given authority to bind and loose, and whatever they decide the same shall be done in haven. How much more explicit does it have to be.
if His intent was to give men total authority in the way men were claiming it centuries later.
It sure sounds that way. Sacraments are binding. And only validly ordained priesthood has that authority.
Yet, some of your Catholic brothers have used it in the way I described, where only Peter was specifically charged with the task of feeding the sheep.
He was the elder brother to the Apostles, but not their lord. As the oldest among them, he was given more responsibility but not more authority. We consider the Bishop of Rome very much in the same light.
Traditionally, the East always looked at the Bishop of Rome as the "elder" brother who was charged with universal pastoral role, but not universal jurisdiction.
I’ve already stated the APOSTLES COULD NOT BREATH ON THEM. That is an ACT OF GOD not something MEN COULD DO. THAT IS WHY THEY PRAYED TO THE HOLY SPIRIT THE COMFORTER THE GIVER OF TRUTH WHO WOULD MAKE THE APOSTLES REMEMBER CHRIST WORDS THEY’D FORGOTTEN to CARRY OUT THESE ACTIONS PROMISED BY CHRIST TO PRESERVE THE CHURCH.
Your whole ACTIONS OF MEN argument is naive protestant propaganda. The Orthodox do not believe in actions of men they believe that Christ fulfilled his promise and sent the Holy Spirit to his church to guide it. (Mostly from 20000+ protestant schismatics channeling Satan’s wish for a divided church)
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.