Replies

> What was the Christian church before Martin Luther and Henry VIII?

Please read “The Pilgrim Church” by E.H. Broadbent.

There were many, many other sects before and concurrent with the emergence of Roman Catholicism; the Paulicians, the Albigenses, the Waldensians, and many others. These were usually horribly persecuted by the emerging Catholic majority.

Then there were the Medici and Lucrecia Borgia. Oy.

All that aside, there were many abuses by all kinds of people who called themselves Christians but behaved like genocidal savages.

Erasmus, when reading a Greek Bible for the first time, wrote, “Either this is not the Bible, or we are not Christians.”

Let us focus on the words of Jesus in John 14, where He said three times, “That ye love one another.”

I don’t care what your tradition is. If you love Jesus, and He is your Lord and Savior, then you are my brother or sister.

You wrote:

“Erasmus, when reading a Greek Bible for the first time, wrote, “Either this is not the Bible, or we are not Christians.””

Erasmus never said any such thing. You’re thinking of Thomas Linacre and that comment is probably taken out of context: “Either this is not the Gospel… or we are not Christians.” I would not rely on anti-Catholic websites for your info on the history of Christianity.

You also wrote:

“There were many, many other sects before and concurrent with the emergence of Roman Catholicism;”

Catholicism is Christianity. You apparently ascribe to a version of history that is ahistorical.

“the Paulicians, the Albigenses, the Waldensians, and many others.”

The Albigensians were not even Christians.

“These were usually horribly persecuted by the emerging Catholic majority.”

The majority were always Catholic.

“Then there were the Medici and Lucrecia Borgia. Oy.”

No, the Oy vey belongs in a conversation about the myths you’re unwittingly imbibed. Lucretia Borgia did nothing - if you look at the actual evidence - that ‘s because there is not actual evidence that Lucretia ever poisoned anyone or committed incest or any of the usual outrageous claims made against her. One of the problems for modern morons is that renaissance writers who hated someone made up all sorts of impossible, implausible and unfactual things about their enemies and people today assume they are true. All modern investigations have shown that there is no credible evidence Lucretia committed any of the crimes she has been accused of for centuries.

“All that aside, there were many abuses by all kinds of people who called themselves Christians but behaved like genocidal savages.”

Genocidal savages? How many of those were there really? I mean, seriously, come on.

“Let us focus on the words of Jesus in John 14, where He said three times, “That ye love one another.””

It’s hard to focus on that when you have nitwits spreading falsehoods and gullibly believing every bad rumor they’ve ever heard.

“I don’t care what your tradition is. If you love Jesus, and He is your Lord and Savior, then you are my brother or sister.”

Then don’t spread lies and half-truths about your brothers and sisters. Actually study history and know what you’re talking about. Is that too much to ask?

"There were many, many other sects before and concurrent with the emergence of Roman Catholicism; the Paulicians, the Albigenses, the Waldensians, and many others. These were usually horribly persecuted by the emerging Catholic majority."

I hate to tell you this but if you can actually agree with the theology of any of those groups then the vast majority of Christians would call you a heretic. Do you actually KNOW what these people believed or have you just sopped up some dimwits feeble attempt to "prove" there was always a parallel church?

Sorry, but even though I'm not a Catholic, I don't want to be accused of having grown out of the many cults that were far from being Christian even if the popular myth says they were the "real Church". The more I see people thinking this way and making up their own versions of history, the more I realize that Luther was little more than a horney guy with a guilt complex. At least he didn't add his own book to the Bible the way Calvin did, he just tossed out seven books that had been part of the recognized Bible for almost 1200 years.

You and folks like you are a good recruitment effort for the Catholic Church, that's for sure. If most of the RCIA programs weren't being run by fools who are more liberal leftist than Catholic there'd be a huge increase in the number of Catholics in this country.

Paulicians: In their doctrine there are two principles, two kingdoms. The Evil Spirit is the author of, and lord of, the present visible world; the Good Spirit, of the future world. The Paulicians accepted the four Gospels; fourteen Epistles of Paul; the three Epistles of John; the epistles of James and Jude; and an Epistle to the Laodiceans, which they professed to have. They rejected the Tanakh also known as the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament. To them Christ came down from heaven to emancipate humans from the body and from the world, which are evil. The reverence for the Cross they looked upon as heathenish. Paulicians ascribed the creation of the world to the evil God (demiurge)

Albigensians: They believed there existed within mankind a spark of divine light. This light, or spirit, had fallen into captivity within a realm of corruption identified with the physical body and world.

According to the Cathars, the world had been created by a lesser deity, much like the figure known in classical Gnostic myth as the Demiurge. This creative force was identified with Satan; most forms of classical Gnosticism had not made this explicit link between the Demiurge and Satan. Spirit, the vital essence of humanity, was thus trapped in a polluted world created by a usurper God and ruled by his corrupt minions.

The goal of Cathar eschatology was liberation from the realm of limitation and corruption identified with material existence

Once cognizant of the grim existential reality of human existence (the "prison" of matter), the path to spiritual liberation became obvious: matter's enslaving bonds must be broken. This was a step-by-step process, accomplished in different measures by each individual. The Cathars accepted the idea of reincarnation. Those who were unable to achieve liberation during their current mortal journey would return another time to continue the struggle for perfection. Thus, it should be understood that being reincarnated was neither inevitable nor desirable, and that it occurred because not all humans could break the enthralling chains of matter within a single lifetime.

As death drew near many would shun further food or drink in order to speed death. This is Jainism.

Sexual intercourse and reproduction propagated the slavery of spirit to flesh, hence procreation was considered undesirable. Informal relationships were considered preferable to marriage among Cathar credentes. Perfecti were supposed to have observed complete celibacy, and eventual separation from a partner would be necessary for those who would become Perfecti. For the credentes however, sexual activity was not prohibited, but procreation was strongly discouraged, resulting in the charge by their opponents of sexual perversion