Yes, I know

Yes, I know about that link to Richard Bennett's site, which Candy hid in her otherwise innocent post on the "emergent church cult."

The problem is, Richard Bennett is always really, really, wrong. And it takes time to write out a lengthly rebuttal of all that wrongness.

I mean, right on the first page of this three part article, he says "What McLaren never tells is that the authority of the Roman Papacy was not well established until near the end of the eleventh century, when by crusades and the Inquisition, the Papacy by coercion forced people to submit to her ecclesiastical dictates."

Pope Clement wrote in the 90's AD that The Church of God which sojourns in Rome to the Church of God which sojourns in Corinth....If anyone disobey the things which have been said by Him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger."

Pope Damascus wrote in the late 300's "Why then do you again ask me for the condemnation of Timotheus? Here, by the judgment of the apostolic see, in the presence of Peter, bishop of Alexandria, he was condemned, together with his teacher, Apollinarius, who will also in the day of judgment undergo due punishment and torment. But if he succeeds in persuading some less stable men, as though having some hope, after by his confession changing the true hope which is in Christ, with him shall likewise perish whoever of set purpose withstands the order of the Church. May God keep you sound, most honoured sons."

There are lots more examples, but clearly, the papacy was well-established before the eleventh century.

So, just take my word for it, Richard Bennett is not a reliable source of information. You can read previous posts about him on this blog here and here.

You can also read the full text of the document which Bennett quotes from here.





Stumble It!