. Was the Roman Empire, Empire not Republic, destroyed by internal pressures, extern

In my opinion TWT Conrad is just asking you to clarify your position, with some data that will support your view. You mentioned the third Lateran Council, but what i think you mean is the Forth Lateran Council which did bring to the Holy Mother Church several decrees including the most important dogma of Transubstantiation or "The True Body and Blood of Christ present in the Holy Eucharist"

You say that the Doge defied Pope Innocent III, do you mean the Blind Doge of Venice, Enrico Dandolo? Was not he the one who played an important role in the destruction of Byzantium (the Fourth Crusade), through shrewdness no doubt, yet highly successful in establishing a Catholic state or the Latin Empire in the east. You say for a short period of time, ok, however the Eastern Orthodox Church (not the Greek OC or Coptic) is now and presently under the Holy See and has been since then. Which in retrospect would support your view that the Roman Empire just transitioned into the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

The Albagenses Heresy was put down, the Cathars fled to Spain,
The Waldenses Heresy was put down, the followers of Waldo fled to the Alps, all during the papacy of Pope Innocent III.

I would agree with Conrad that this Pope is history's most powerful Bishop of Rome. In the twentynine years of his ascendancy, he commanded not only the spiritual responsibility of the 'church militant' to reach the sainthood of the 'church triumphant', but also established controlling authority over the secular affairs of Germany and Italy.

I think the point of contention is the idea of translating the term 'Power' into 'Greatness'. So then establish the Thread of Power vs. Greatness, however, i would humbly suggest, for the edification of the readers of these threads to add some tidbits of historical data to support your views, so that we may all close our laptops refreshed with knowledge gained that was previously unknown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Alboin

In my opinion TWT Conrad is just asking you to clarify your position, with some data that will support your view. You mentioned the third Lateran Council, but what i think you mean is the Forth Lateran Council which did bring to the Holy Mother Church several decrees including the most important dogma of Transubstantiation or "The True Body and Blood of Christ present in the Holy Eucharist"

You say that the Doge defied Pope Innocent III, do you mean the Blind Doge of Venice, Enrico Dandolo? Was not he the one who played an important role in the destruction of Byzantium (the Fourth Crusade), through shrewdness no doubt, yet highly successful in establishing a Catholic state or the Latin Empire in the east. You say for a short period of time, ok, however the Eastern Orthodox Church (not the Greek OC or Coptic) is now and presently under the Holy See and has been since then. Which in retrospect would support your view that the Roman Empire just transitioned into the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

The Albagenses Heresy was put down, the Cathars fled to Spain,
The Waldenses Heresy was put down, the followers of Waldo fled to the Alps, all during the papacy of Pope Innocent III.

I would agree with Conrad that this Pope is history's most powerful Bishop of Rome. In the twentynine years of his ascendancy, he commanded not only the spiritual responsibility of the 'church militant' to reach the sainthood of the 'church triumphant', but also established controlling authority over the secular affairs of Germany and Italy.

I think the point of contention is the idea of translating the term 'Power' into 'Greatness'. So then establish the Thread of Power vs. Greatness, however, i would humbly suggest, for the edification of the readers of these threads to add some tidbits of historical data to support your views, so that we may all close our laptops refreshed with knowledge gained that was previously unknown.

---

Conrad and I have been around this one a few times, but let me see if I can clarify my think for you. First off you are totally right, 4th not 3rd, sometimes I get the mixed up. Second, I am referring to the Doge, who managed to hijack the crusade called by Innocent, and turn it to his own purposes, if you need more than a Whikipedia citation on this I can get it, but don’t have the books at my fingertips, as for the Orthodox Church being under the Holy See the Orthodox Website http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/orthodoxy.aspx, would seem to disagree. You mention the two heresies, my contentions is that a powerful and prestigious leader is not one who can crush a rebellion, but one who never has to deal with one in the first place. In my opinion, and this is a matter of opinion having to contend with multiple heresies, and lousing control of a crusade take Innocent out of the running for most powerful and prestigious.

Hmmm....theology websites, history websites, published books, encyclopedias versus TWT.

The truth of the matter is apparent and thus it is easy to ascertain which of the two choices is factual as compared to the other representing unbearable arrogance..

Conrad, if you want to though down with me, send a PM, if not please exsplain what if anything this last post had to do with my post, with Albion's, or even how it was in anyway constuctive

This is the same situation as the "commonwealth" discussion; despite all the historical data of Thomas Aquinus, Edward Gibbon, Moore, Joseph Addison, etc through the terminology in their published works as well as websites and articles, you maintain that the term "commonwealth" is inaccurate and totally irrelevant despite you providing no evidence on your part. It is good to have opinions, but historical fact is historical fact/truth.

Conrad I provided dictionary definitions as well as articals which you simply ignored, it is impossible to provide evidence when you apparently don't even look at the links I post

That is false; you only provided a link to the Encyclopedia Britannica.

I hope this is large enough for you:

http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogu...sbn=0521459591

http://img.infibeam.com/img/95a1130a...0024049803.jpg

You know Conrad, I don't know why I let my self get pulled into these things with you, somehow eventhough the first thing that you said to me was the I was stupid, I paraphrase, I still think I can get though to you, now I have adressed this many time, and could many more, but I'm done, I give up, you win, form now on I will simply ignor all comments, and post made by you without regaurd to their acuracy or you abulity to tell the diffrence between upper and lower case, good day.

I believe that the c letters are uppercase on the book images; the lowercase c letter for "commonwealth" derives from the term politeia/polity which then translates to res publica in the latin language that then closely translate to the English term of "commonwealth".

The ideas of the term "commonwealth" differ depending on the particular period being observed: the Roman Commonwealth concept differs from the Periclean Commonwealth/democratic process as well as the Hobbesian Commonwealth. Then, the lowercase c letter becomes an uppercase c letter as the particular model/definition of the term commonwealth is being applied to the particular period. Thus, Roman Commonwealth.

I, for my self, would like to apologise for the uglyness displayed here by both my self and Conrad, though it is no excuse sometimes tempers get heated. I have added Conrad to my Ignore list so as not to be tempted to respond, and so I can now say this thread is once more safe for passersby.