When did it all go wrong?

[Earth Wind and Fire]

If you like.....Cathlicks have been called Roamin Micks ...it is hardly racial as Catholics are of all colours and nations. If I don't find it offensive (being one) why should you? Bigotry is far worse to my mind.

Tarring all priests as pedophiles is offensive, there are by far more holy and good men as priests.

Your missing my points. We have enough haters in here, looking for reasons to start arguments. Dont need to give them added reasons. Right?

 

[Matt Black]

Google Simon Magus

So you're going for gnosticism? Interesting. Please explain why.

 

[percho]

So you're going for gnosticism? Interesting. Please explain why.

Can not explain. I have not studied this. Is gnosticism what Simon M taught. It is just who and what came to mind when I read the OP. Seems like I read somewhere at some point in the past that Magus went to Rome and was called Pope or something like that. As I said haven't studied this.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Matt......just speaking for my country, it all went wrong with this guy...roll um!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlcE3HVRlRs

 

[glfredrick]

I see the problem stemming from some other date than that listed in the poll. The beginning and solidification of the Magisterium, and with that the advent of Sacred Tradition, which stood equal to Scriptural Revelation in the eyes of the Church, were the leading edge of "going wrong."

God seems to have wanted a local body of believers who would each be regenerate, and responsive to the leadership of the Holy Spirit in accordance with the Word, but this was supplanted in the hierarchical Magisterium of the RCC, who had a great need to consolidate power with the advent of State approval so as to eliminate rivals and institute what they saw as God's Kingdom on earth.

Interesting is the fact that the term Magisterium derives from the Latin, which was not even a major force in the early church until around circa AD 300. But the early Magisterium was still made up of regional Bishops until another hundred years had passed.

Pope Leo (circa AD 445) made the decision that the Roman bishop (or "papias" = Pope) would be the preeminent figure in the Church. It was Leo I who first pressed forward the concept that Peter was the first Pope (Petrine Supremacy), and the revision of early church history began at that moment. Sacred Tradition, being held in the hands of the Roman Pope, and interpreted almost fully by him, and the suppression of the Word, led to excesses in the church, changes in the baptismal structure, and eventually the payment of penance, indulgences, the sacramental system (as codified), and other non-Scriptural doctrines led the Church into a place where it stood against the very Word that formed it.

 

[Alive in Christ]

However, come what may, the RCC will stand until the coming of the Lord in Triumph as He has assured us that Hell will not prevail against her.

Hell does not have to "prevail" against the Catholic church of Rome.

Hell has already indwelt it. Its been under the control of hell for centuries.

 

[Matt Black]

And when, for the purposes of the poll, do you say that happened?

Can not explain. I have not studied this. Is gnosticism what Simon M taught. It is just who and what came to mind when I read the OP. Seems like I read somewhere at some point in the past that Magus went to Rome and was called Pope or something like that. As I said haven't studied this.

Magus is credited by Irenaeus, that great opponent of gnosticism, with having started the gnostic ball rolling (in reality, various gnostic systems were around which Simon probably just bought into); it's ironic given what you say that Magus was in fact rebuked by that other Simon, called Peter, whom Catholics say was the first Pope...

 

[Matt Black]

I see the problem stemming from some other date than that listed in the poll. The beginning and solidification of the Magisterium, and with that the advent of Sacred Tradition, which stood equal to Scriptural Revelation in the eyes of the Church, were the leading edge of "going wrong."

God seems to have wanted a local body of believers who would each be regenerate, and responsive to the leadership of the Holy Spirit in accordance with the Word, but this was supplanted in the hierarchical Magisterium of the RCC, who had a great need to consolidate power with the advent of State approval so as to eliminate rivals and institute what they saw as God's Kingdom on earth.

Interesting is the fact that the term Magisterium derives from the Latin, which was not even a major force in the early church until around circa AD 300. But the early Magisterium was still made up of regional Bishops until another hundred years had passed.

Pope Leo (circa AD 445) made the decision that the Roman bishop (or "papias" = Pope) would be the preeminent figure in the Church. It was Leo I who first pressed forward the concept that Peter was the first Pope (Petrine Supremacy), and the revision of early church history began at that moment. Sacred Tradition, being held in the hands of the Roman Pope, and interpreted almost fully by him, and the suppression of the Word, led to excesses in the church, changes in the baptismal structure, and eventually the payment of penance, indulgences, the sacramental system (as codified), and other non-Scriptural doctrines led the Church into a place where it stood against the very Word that formed it.

It sounds like that you're going for the fall of the Western Roman Empire option, by and large, although Tradition was around as early as Ignatius (fl. c. 107 AD) and arguably is present in St Paul's Pastoral Epistles...

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Still on this thread my friend....OK it all went wrong for humans in the Garden of Eden. But for Lucifer, a celestial being, much sooner.

Ive also explained the Fall of the American Empire IE George Bush, Rome fell when the decadent Greeks entered the picture--Ask Cato the Elder (my hero) & when would you place the British Empires demise? And don't tell me the Welsh! Could it be when Kraft Corporation bought Cadbury?

 

[Matt Black]

The catalyst for the British Empire's demise was WW1.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The catalyst for the British Empire's demise was WW1.

I would put it before that. Blame it on cultural direction that can be seen during the British conflict in Sudan. World War 1 became a certain mess and we can see the monumental mistakes and errors of Winston Churchill in his dealing with Turkey. Fortunatly, he made up for them in WWII.

 

[Ed Edwards]

During the time before Constatine became sole Emperor of the Roman Empire, there were about 30 years when there were a fluxating group of up to six different Emperor Candidates. The Emperor of what is now Turkey (Aisian part only) lead the 10th and greatest persecution of the Roman Empire of Christians. As soon as Constatine became Emperor (with the help of the Christians), the Asian Christians thought they could torture and kill the Pagans. When the Christians hate and kill -- they have missed out on something. :-(

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I would put it before that. Blame it on cultural direction that can be seen during the British conflict in Sudan. World War 1 became a certain mess and we can see the monumental mistakes and errors of Winston Churchill in his dealing with Turkey. Fortunately, he made up for them in WWII.

And whats not to like about Winston.....yes I am drunk madam & you are quite ugly. But tomorrow I will be sober & you will still be ugly. Masterful. The guy didnt want socialism & was swept out of office because of it. Now there was a guy with a set. Has Britain had any real leaders since? Not a slight just an observation.

But what is the full post mortem on the failure of the British Empire. BTW, worked with British forces in Kuwait ....top notch!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

And whats not to like about Winston.....yes I am drunk madam & you are quite ugly. But tomorrow I will be sober & you will still be ugly. Masterful. The guy didnt want socialism & was swept out of office because of it. Now there was a guy with a set. Has Britain had any real leaders since? Not a slight just an observation.

But what is the full post mortem on the failure of the British Empire. BTW, worked with British forces in Kuwait ....top notch!

I thought Maggie was a real man's man! Heck if she ran here I'd vote for her.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I thought Maggie was a real man's man! Heck if she ran here I'd vote for her.

Ballsy gal.....agreed. Just don't know why a people of that grit & industry who "Ruled The Waves" could have ever fallen down. What were the underlying reasons? Guess I just want to compare notes as I see America faltering unfortunately.

 

[Matt Black]

Part of it was we ran out of money particularly after WW2. We were in hock big-time to the US and Truman refused to bail us out on a no-strings basis re the Empire as he hated colonialism

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Been away from the BB for awhile--came back and found this interesting (and entertaining) thread :smilewinkgrin: .

At any rate, I selected 'other date' since I don't think there is one particular date when 'it went wrong'. The papacy developed over time. Certainly the fall of the western empire created a vacuum in which the bishop of Rome was required to assume more temporal responsibilities. However, the bishop of the Roman church had prestige (due to that city's position in the empire and the church's connection to Peter and Paul) going back to at least the second century, and it the case of Victor in the Quartodeciman controversey the Roman bishop actually tried to exert unilateral authority over other portions of the Church earning a rebuke from the good bishop Irenaeus. The estrangement of East and West seemed to accelerate the development of the papacy in an increasing authoritarian (and more corrupt) direction, and at Trent the Roman church seemed to further paint itself in a theological corner (albeit a rather large corner) so to speak.

BTW--Matt it's good to know we're related (or, as they say in the South, 'kin') :laugh:

 

[Alive in Christ]

For those of you here who believe that the ecclesial organisation headed by an elderly gentleman in the Vatican is the Spawn of Satan, when do you say this organisation started up and hence when did Christianity start to go horribly wrong? Was it

1. When the last of the Apostles died (what I call the 'Mormon view')?

2. When the Constantinian-Theodosian Settlement was Established in the 4th century (what I call the 'Classic Radical Reformation' view)?

3. When the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 allowing the Papacy's power to rise (what I call the 'Whig' view; see eg: Gibbons' Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire)?

4. When the Great Schism of 1054 happened (my view, which is also the view of the Orthodox Church and Magisterial Reformers such as Luther)?

5. When the Council of Trent happened in 1545-63 (the view of some Protestants)?

6. When the Second Vatican Council was held in 1962-5 (the view of traditionalist Catholics)?

7. Another date/ event?

Please give reasons for your answers

Q: When did it go wrong?

A: In the process of time.

Doesnt matter the exact time or year. IT WENT WRONG, and RIGHT NOW it is exceedingly obvious that it went wrong.

Questions like this come across as a desperate attempt to divert attension and cause people to abandon the real problem...

The hellish apostacy and wickedness of the false Church of Rome.

 

[Palatka51]

When Constantine instituted the Church of Rome as the religion of the state and integrated his sun worshiping pagan ideals. :tonofbricks:

 

[Matt Black]

So, again, I ask, specifically which new heretical doctrines did Constantine impose on the Church? Which apostate Bishops did he appoint (what were their names)?