I suppose this was coming..........

Vatican bemoans ‘wound’ of other churches
By Laura Clout and agencies
Last Updated: 10:28am BST 11/07/2007

Christian denominations outside Roman Catholicism are either defective or are not full churches of Jesus Christ, the Vatican has reaffirmed.

A 16-page document released by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which Pope Benedict XVI once headed, described Orthodox churches as true churches, but said they are suffering from a “wound” since they do not recognise the primacy of the Pope.

The document, approved by Pope Benedict, went on to say the “wound is still more profound” in Protestant denominations.

advertisement"Despite the fact that this teaching has created no little distress… it is nevertheless difficult to see how the title of ‘church’ could possibly be attributed to them,” it said.

The Vatican text, formulated as five questions and answers, restates key sections of the controversial document “Dominus Iesus”, written by the Pope in 2000 when he was prefect of the congregation.

It said the Church wanted to stress this point because some Catholic theologians continued to misunderstand it.

While there was nothing doctrinally new in the document, it nevertheless prompted swift criticism from Protestants, Lutherans and other Christian denominations.

“It makes us question the seriousness with which the Roman Catholic Church takes it dialogues with the Reformed family and other families of the church,” said the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, which includes 75 million Reformed Christians in 214 churches in 107 countries.

“It makes us question whether we are indeed praying together for Christian unity,” the alliance said in a letter to the Vatican’s key ecumenical official Cardinal Walter Kasper.

The document is the Pope’s second strong reaffirmation of Catholic tradition in less than a week, following a decree on Saturday restoring the old Latin Mass alongside the modern liturgy.

Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright

This is an internal ecclesiastical dispute, with no relation to temporal gpvernments, so the the use of the word KING is totally inappropriate.  Perhaps a better word to use might be “tyrant” or “authoritarian”.  After all, Christians traditionally have striven to keep church affairs and state affairs separate.

What difference does it make? What is Catholicism other than the “cult of Mary”? Because of thier strange reverence for Mary, it makes the whole concept somewhat speculative. Jesus is the center of the faith of Christianity, Mary was a tool of God used for one purpose. Jesus was used for the purpose of eternity. Popes are irrelevant. Saint whoever from the 12th century is irrelevant.  Notice how the Catholic Church still has Jesue hanging on the cross. He’s been off that cross a long time, and alive, amongst us at this very moment. Catholic people are good people, tunfortunatley the doctrimes they follow are wrong.

Just like Islam.

“… Perhaps a better word to use might be “tyrant” or “authoritarian”.  After all, Christians traditionally have striven to keep church affairs and state affairs separate.”

WELL!  I certainly cannot agree that Christians have striven to keep church affairs & state affairs separate.

Back in the day, the popes of Rome and the statesmen of Rome (think Medicis) were one and the same. 

These days in the USA, the next president may well be elected on religious issues.  There are coalitions created for this exact purpose.

The merging of church and state that you mentioned applied only to the state of Florence.  In the rest of the Christian world the Pope appointed the clergy, and the kings appointed their vassals.  Except for a short hiatus, when the French king kept the Pope captive at Avignon, the the two hierarchies were separate.