Still pounding the same revisionist drum, eh brakelight? Leave it to you to attack
unapproved apparitions. We ignore Medjugorje but you are out of touch with Catholic realities to know Medjugorje has been rejected. I don't see you attacking Protestant so-called "Bible prophecy" that floods the internet. I don't think you are very smart. Calling intercession "necromancy" is the epitome of prot ignorance. If Jesus' mother is dead, then so is her offspring.
Think hard about what that implies, if you can.
You must be a Baptist secessionist to be waving heretics like the Hussites, the Waldenses, or the Albigenses as if they were great heros. The Hussites wanted communion under both species, even though it was not practical, and they went to war with anyone who got in there way. At this time in history anybody you didn't like was a heretic.
Hussite Wars - Wikipedia
The book by the Baptist historian McGoldrick that demolishes the above statements is titled
Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History (The American Theological Library Association and The Scarecrow Press, 1994). McGoldrick examines many groups claimed as "early Baptists" (or early Evangelicals who are "baptistic") such as the Montanists, Novatians, Paulicians, Bogomils, Albigenses, Waldenses and other groups and individuals. None of these groups were in fact "early Evangelicals" but were either explicitly Catholic in doctrine or grossly heretical (such as the later Albigenses who denied the Incarnation). Baptists originate in the early 17th century in Holland and England. So why do these groups claim to be early evangelicals? They all had a spirit of rebellion.
"Although no reputable Church historians have ever affirmed the belief that Baptists can trace their lineage through medieval and ancient sects ultimately to the New Testament, that point of view enjoys a large following nevertheless. It appears that scholars aware of this claim have deemed it unworthy of their attention, which may account for the persistence and popularity of Baptist successionism as a doctrine as well as an interpretation of church history. Aside from occasional articles and booklets that reject this teaching, no one has published a refutation in a systematic, documented format. The present work is an effort to supply this need so that Baptists may have a thorough analysis of successionism, together with a reliable account of their origins as a Protestant religious body." (McGoldrick, preface page iv)
"It is the purpose of this book to show that, although free church groups in ancient and medieval times sometimes promoted doctrines and practices agreeable to modern Baptists, when judged by standards now acknowledged as baptistic,
not one of them merits recognition as a Baptist church. Baptists arose in the seventeenth century in Holland and England. They are Protestants, heirs of the Reformers." (ibid, page 2,
emphasis mine)
The following is adapted from McGoldrick's chapter on the Waldenses of the 12th and 13th centuries which examines their origins and founder Peter Waldo, their explicit Catholic doctrines and beliefs, a short account of their history, and where they are today (hint: they did later become a Protestant sect, but were never "baptistic" in belief).
Based on your previous posts, I would say you are a Baptist Successionist, or Landmark Baptist.
When Baptists attempt to discover the origins of their tradition they are faced with a historical dilemma. The search for Baptists roots hits a dead end in the sixteenth century. Most acknowledge that Baptist tradition is a tributary flowing out of the Protestant Reformation, but others attempt to discover a line of historical continuity, of doctrine and practice, back to Jesus and even John the Baptist. These Baptists are commonly referred to “Baptist Successionists”. Such a historical continuity is a factual impossibility.
Such a historical continuity is a factual impossibility though the proponents continue aggressively promoting their theories. First, we will summarize the popular theory as espoused in the popular booklet The Trail of Blood and secondly, we will analyze their position historically. It is helpful to remember, according to
W. Morgan Patterson, associate professor of church history at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, that the “Baptist historians”-those who are proponents of this view-”have been preachers and pastors first of all, and historians second” (Baptist Successionism, [Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1980), 5.
http://www.catholic-convert.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/TrailOfBlood.pdf
G 6,429 and 432.
