Posted on 06/22/2009 7:28:34 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
History is the great debunker of pre-conceived ideas that are rooted in ideology and false piety rather than in reality.
Without a grasp of history, and of the history of the papacy in particular, many Catholics are led to believe that the papacy must always have been as they have known it, and most popes have been just like the popes of the 20th and 21st centuries: Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI.
The pontificates of a thousand years ago, however, were very different from any that we have experienced in our lifetimes.
First of all, we do not even know how the pontificate of John XVIII ended in 1009. Did the pope abdicate before his death and, if so, was it under duress?
If he did abdicate, what did he do after he left the papacy? No living Catholic has ever seen that happen. Indeed, for those who tend to look upon popes as quasi-divine figures, papal resignation is simply unthinkable. Once a pope, always a pope -- until death. No?
According to some historical sources, Pope John XVIII most likely did abdicate, or resign, the papacy shortly before his death, and then became a monk at the basilica of St. Paul's Outside the Walls in Rome, where he is buried.
Otherwise, little is known of his pontificate. We do know that during this period of church history, from 1003 to 1012, one of the powerful Roman families, the Crescentiis, ruled the city and dominated the papacy itself.
From 999 to 1003 the first French pope, Sylvester II, was seated on the Chair of Peter. A dedicated reformer, he denounced simony (the buying and selling of spiritual goods and church offices), nepotism (favoring members of one's own family for appointment to church offices), and violations of clerical celibacy. He also insisted on the free election of abbots by monks.
But in February of 1001 the Roman citizenry revolted against foreign domination. The French pope and his German friend and ally, Emperor Otto III, were forced to leave the city.
Otto died the following year, before he could reestablish his authority in Rome. The new head of the Crescentii family, John Crescentius II, allowed the French pope to return, but only on condition that he limit himself to spiritual functions. The pope died less than a year later.
A relative of the dominant Crescentii family succeeded Sylvester II in an election that was undoubtedly engineered by the family's leader. What was also remarkable, besides the decisive influence of a layman on a papal election, is the fact that the new pope, John XVII, had been married before ordination to the priesthood and was the father of three sons.
The pope's only notable recorded papal act was his authorizing of Polish missionaries to work among the Slavs. It is not even known how he died or how old he was at the time of death.
Although John XVII was pope for less than six months, his pontificate was not among the shortest in history. For purposes of comparison, Pope John Paul I was in office for just 33 days in 1978, yet his was only the 11th briefest pontificate in history.
John XVIII was cardinal-priest of St. Peter's Basilica when elected to the papacy on Christmas Day 1003 (the Vatican's official list begins his pontificate in January 1004). None of his accomplishments as pope have had any lasting historical significance beyond certain locales.
Thus, he restored the diocese of Merseburg in Germany, which Pope Benedict VII had sup-pressed and divided at the request of Emperor Otto II, and John XVIII also approved the establishment of the diocese of Bamberg in Bavaria.
He summoned the bishops of Sens and Orleans to Rome under pain of excommunication because of their threats to the papal privileges granted to the abbey of Fleury.
There is some evidence that relations between Rome and Constantinople improved during John XVIII's pontificate, probably because of the pro-Byzantine sympathies of the Crescentii family. The pope's name was restored to the list of those to be prayed for at Mass in Constantinople.
However, the thaw was relatively brief. Less than 50 years later, the formal schism between East and West began, and remains in effect to this day.
John XVIII was probably forced to resign in late June or early July, 1009 -- almost exactly one thousand years ago.
His successor was Sergius IV who, because his baptismal name was Peter, changed it upon election. Taking a new papal name was still not the custom.
Alas, Sergius IV was murdered.
Yes, it was a Baptist Church until our pastor came. We kept it a Baptist Church and stayed in the local Baptist conference. We decided a few years ago that we could no longer call ourselves Baptists because people expected it to be a typical Baptist church, which it wasn’t. We simply changed the name to reflect that we are a Spirit-filled church and believe in the gifts, etc. We still have older Baptists in the congregation and we’re not wildly pentecostal.
We are under the umbrella of Elim since our pastors went there for training, but we’re independent of them. They don’t tell us what to do. But they’re there if our pastors need something. They go there for conferences, etc.
The leader of Elim is not our pastor. You guys have really got that messed up. He is an estate planner. Some of us go to him for help. He doesn’t channel our money to Elim or anywhere else. We’re lucky and blessed to have a Christian estate planner and health care advisor right here. he was an estate planner long before he became our pastor. You don’t seem to understand that. I won’t mention any names because they are used against us here. Sorry.
To make it clearer, OUR pastor is the estate planner, not the head of Elim. Get it?
***Yes, it was a Baptist Church until our pastor came. We kept it a Baptist Church and stayed in the local Baptist conference. We decided a few years ago that we could no longer call ourselves Baptists because people expected it to be a typical Baptist church, which it wasn’t. We simply changed the name to reflect that we are a Spirit-filled church and believe in the gifts, etc. We still have older Baptists in the congregation and we’re not wildly pentecostal.***
Does that mean that your theology is mobile?
***We are under the umbrella of Elim since our pastors went there for training, but we’re independent of them. They don’t tell us what to do. But they’re there if our pastors need something. They go there for conferences, etc.***
Not sure what this means. Can you elaborate?
***The leader of Elim is not our pastor. You guys have really got that messed up.***
We are unacquainted with the different hierarchies of different entities. We have the hierarchy of the Church which is fairly straightforward. I don’t understand this connection to Elim if you are Elim and yet not.
***Some of us go to him for help. ***
I’m not getting the whole setup here. Can you elaborate?
Elim is where our pastors took their training. Elim has no control over our church. We’re an independent body. Elim is there if our pastors need help with anything but they have no control over our body there.
I’m not elaborating any further. I’ve told you what you need to know.
***I’m not elaborating any further. I’ve told you what you need to know.***
What you’ve told us is that your pastor, trained by the Elim cult, takes your money for some investment scheme.
Nice. The Church doesn’t engage in that sort of behaviour.
You are such a liar. This is no investment scheme. He is an estate planner and has been for years,a Godly man that I’ve known for over 25 years. He invests my money conservatively in places like American Funds. All legitimate. My, what a nasty person you are. Your church has cheated people out of their salvation. Money is nothing.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
He lies about my pastor in every post he makes to me. He loves to taunt me about the fact that I have trusted this precious man of God with my retirement funds. He’s an estate planner, not a charlatan. Mark IS a liar when he keeps insisting my pastor is a crook.
Don’t use the word “lie.” It is inflammatory. If the other poster’s remark is false, misleading, incorrect, wrong, uninformed then say so. None of those terms “make it personal.”
***You are such a liar.***
Nice.
***This is no investment scheme. He is an estate planner and has been for years,a Godly man that I’ve known for over 25 years. He invests my money conservatively in places like American Funds. All legitimate.***
So was Bernard Madoff.
***My, what a nasty person you are.***
Have I ever offered such an opinion about anyone here on FR no matter how much I disagreed with them?
***Your church has cheated people out of their salvation. ***
Prove it.
***Money is nothing.***
And your chicks are free...
I posted before noticing your exchange above. Apologies.
That's what Elim HQ instructs them to say.
***Elim has no control over our church. We’re an independent body. ***
As we previously suspected. In the Catholic Church, we prefer Christ to Elim, if truth be told.
And I most certainly prefer Elim and our church to Catholicism, by a long shot.
S Y!
I want nothing to do with you any longer. You used to be a reasonable opponent. Now you are just bitter and angry. Out darned spot!
***You used to be a reasonable opponent. ***
Funny; I don’t remember you ever saying such nice things in the past. Is my memory faulty?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.