Search results

Well, it would be nice if the rich actually paid the taxes for which they are liable, as a starting point, rather than striking dodgy deals with the taxman, or employing clever accountancy tricks to avoid paying tax. It is surely manifestly unjust that a chief exec pays less tax as a percentage...

Thought this was about the civil war in Syria!

You ever tried to rehydrate a cholera victim with just water?

You won't get the scales to fall from his eyes, I fear.

Oh, I think that Ignatius of Antioch uses the term 'Catholic Church' in much the same way as its later usage eg: in his Letter to the Smyrneans he refers to 'the Catholic Church' [singular] as being 'wherever the bishop is'. The bishop therefore has already emerged by this point (c 110AD) as the...

Indeed. One might add in the division between ordained clergy and laity that is both remarked upon and reinforced by Cyprian of Carthage in the 250s AD (ie: 60 years or so before Constantine's toleration of Christianity). The Catholic Church began waaaay before Constantine.

OK, Vatican City I'll give you, much power that that has. ISTM that for you 'trustworthy' = 'people who agree with me'. Not impressed.

I can kind of see their point, although it is also a case of too many bureaucrats spoiling the common sense: drinking water on it's own does not in and off itself cure dehydration; it only rehydrates you if it is combined with essential salts and other minerals.

But in none of these countries are bishops appointed by the secular authorities, so they cannot be said to be 'state churches'.

I don't think that Catholic bishops and clergy are appointed by any state in South America.

You are missing the point and trying to change the subject in one post, but two points in reply: 1. The Catholic Church is not a 'state church'. It controls no state and no state controls it. 2. I restate the point you are trying to dodge: if the Donatists had been congregationalists then...

They had over 100 years to get their message across. I would hazard a more than educated guess that if they had rejected episcopacy and the sacraments, then Augustine their opponent would have made a lot of hay with them about that. The fact is that he didn't, which leads me to reasonably...

Biblicist, are you saying that John the Baptist was a Baptist?

That sort of thing is one of the few things we still do reasonably well in this country. It doesn't matter to me particularly; it seems to matter to DHK for some reason. But the bizarre thing about this theory - and where it falls down IMO -is that at no point did the nascent Catholic or...

It's really very simple: was the OT written wholly in Hebrew or not? [ETA - to The Biblicist - I prefer to rely on history rather than fables invented to suit a particular group's ideology]

Two points in response: 1. We are at the moment talking about church history (Donatists & Anabaptists, remember?). You clearly don't just accept the Scriptures as what you call 'authoritative' there, since you have already referred me to non-Scriptural secondary (at best) literature in support...

It's an authority I believe you will accept as an Anabaptist, as you appear to be selective in what authorities you will accept. Have you actually read it? What authorities will you accept?

Seeing as how you like Anabaptists, here is an Anabaptist site which confirms they were schismatics rather than what Catholics would label 'heretics' and were sacramentalist.

I was questioning your assertion, which is easily debunked by the facts.

Because the issue of whether or not Donatists were Anabaptist or not is not a matter of traditions but of facts.