On 2020-08-09 10:13, rbowman wrote:
On 08/09/2020 01:25 AM, T wrote:
The Roman church can get legalistic at times.

Contrast the above with the "pre" denominational
ancient church:

Right. This is the church that split off arguing about filoque? I
suppose that was more substantial than fighting over an iota.



The "filoque" is not Jesus' direct teaching. Jesus
was very clear about it. If you are in doubt as
to which side of the Great Schism was correct
(besides the Romans not wanting to help defend
against the Turks), check out which side still
follow the teaching of the seven ecumenical councils.
The homosexual priesthood was instated shortly after
the Romans left the apostolic church.

The Roman church reserves the right to make things
up as they go. The Romans straying from the teaching
of the Bible (filoque for example) and the economical
councils laying the ground work for the Reformation
and the death of 350,000 souls in the process. The
Roman church was complete in the wrong. "indulgences"
comes from what part of the Bible or what ecumenical
council? And selling them????

But as I said before, in aggregate, despite how
frustrating the Romans can be at times, they are still
a force for good in the world and are still my
brothers and sisters in Christ. And I say this as
a former Roman Catholic who skin crawls when I
come is contact with the Roman church. (My
stated reason for leaving was that I make
a terrible secular humanist and a worse communist.)