You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] LexOrandiLexCredendi 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It's much easier to see clearly if you look at the politics of each split. The Orthodox are about the closest to a legit argument, but even that was answered in later councils (Florence, I think). Luther was purely political. Henry VIII was sexual.

The Church does follow the creed, but you cannot expect sinful men to be perfect. The bottom line is this: was Jesus God Incarnate? Even the demons will tell you that. Again, back to Fr. Ripperger. Did He mean what He said when He said "You are Peter ... and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it."

If Jesus' statement was false, than the Church is false and He is a liar and not the Son of God. If His statement is true, than the Church is the one true faith regardless of how sinful its members or leaders are.

0
2

[–] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

In the case of Henry VIII lack of a male heir in those days could very well have led to a disastrous 'War of the English Succession'. It was NOT just about what girls he wanted to fuck.

0
0

[–] LexOrandiLexCredendi ago 

Oh, I know. It also may well have been about a jousting accident which had serious consequences on Henry's brain. There were still other ways to go about resolving succession issues besides splitting from the Church.

0
0

[–] BlackSheepBrouhaha ago 

Always appreciate the bread crumbs you leave for me. Definitely going to look up Florence council while driving deeper into Orthodox.