XPost: alt.talk.creationism, alt.recovery.catholicism   
   From: doldridg@leavethisoutshaw.ca   
      
   duke  wrote in   
   news:nr8ci51s1glbcpltvkej7um4tajulth584@4ax.com:   
      
   >On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 02:21:38 GMT, Dave Oldridge   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>>As I tried to tell you, I'm not arguing whether the sperm is half-way   
   >>>in, or has already starting building a home.  Life begins at   
   >>>conception, not birth.   
   >>   
   >>Life is continuous.  There are events along the way, some more   
   >>significant than others.  There are nearly nine months separating   
   >>implantation from birth.   
   >   
   >Yep, life begins at conception and ends at natural death.   
      
   No, actually the gametes are alive before conception.   
      
   >>>The Pope was in place in the CC, western and eastern divisions,   
   >>>before the schism.  The Pope was still in place in the western   
   >>>division afterwards, to be renamed the RCC.   
   >   
   >>Actually, there was more or less a "big five" in the early days of the   
   >>established Church, those being Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome   
   >>and Constantinople.  When Rome and Constantinople (regrettably)   
   >>excommunicated one another, things became more complex.   
   >   
   >The Pope was given his job description in Jerusalem in 33AD by Jesus   
   >himself and is still in place in 2009AD.   
      
   And your authority for this is that some bishop of Rome declared it?   
      
   >>>I don't know the term "LCC".   
   >   
   >>Liberal Catholic Church.  Though I'm doctrinally closer to the EOC   
   >>than to most LCC bishops these days.   
   >   
   >>>>>I would guess all doctrines are novel at some point.   
   >   
   >>>>Yep, including the notion that the bishop of Rome is Peter's   
   >>>>successor as overall leader of the Church (not just as bishop of   
   >>>>Rome).  Peter served as bishop in Antioch and Alexandria before   
   >>>>Rome.   
   >   
   >>>Uh, actually, Jesus assigned the "Pope = poppa = father"  job   
   >>>description-title to Simon Peter in Jerusalem.  Peter eventually   
   >>>settled in Rome/Vatican later on. And as successors to St. Peter, the   
   >>>man selected as Bishop of Rome is also the Pope.   
   >   
   >>The first part is correct.  The last, not necessarily so and there is   
   >>not unanimity on the doctrine (clearly).   
   >   
   >Both parts are correct.  The line of successor to Peter has never been   
   >broken.   
      
   The succession of bishops of Rome is, indeed, intact.  How many OTHER   
   lineages go back to Peter?  I'm sure Peter consecrated more than one in   
   his career.   
      
   For example, the Orthodox bishop of Alexandria is called "pope" by his   
   churches.   
      
   --   
   Dave Oldridge+   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)