I'd argue the exact opposite. Churches are corrupted by failing to gatekeep bad actors, something a scattered organization expressly can not do.
The Roman Catholic Church certainly failed to do so as well in the past century, but as a structure is certainly capable of actually doing so. It certainly has in the past to good effect.
On what planet is it easier to gatekeep a larger organization than a smaller one? If a small one gets corrupted it is quite simple to rectify or start a new one. And the consequences of the gathering of power when it is inevitably corrupted are always worse the larger it is. The catholic organization is not even a church, it is a government.
And the last hundred years? Try the last thousand at least - do you even know why the schism happened? Corruption has been the mission statement for the catholic church for centuries. They were quite literally selling sin tickets - "indulgences". Pay the church X and you're pre-forgiven for sins.
The pope has always been a heretic because the office of the pope acting as if it is the will of god and stepping between man and god is heresy.
The planet where we're talking about a whole ass religion. Protestantism has the fatal flaw that they don't gatekeep anything, you are one if you say you are.
That is the flaw of decentralization. Even the Orthodox guys have a pontiff. Protestantism is either totally disorganized or else democracy posing as a religion.
Oh and lastly, indulgences from hundreds of years ago bother you so much but literally voting this very year to declare huge chunks of the Bible invalid is cool? I can't imagine you find that theologically sound.
What you're missing is that the decisions of some council of faggots hold no weight - they have no power, no authority over any other church. Probably within 5 miles of those faggots and their heresy there's another functional church. No faggots can dictate terms and conditions to the other churches, unlike the catholics.
My comment about indulgences was referring to your pretense that the catholic church has only recently been corrupt. They have always been. These godless larping methodists are clearly just as bad, but they have no power.
I understand it perfectly well. You're failing to understand why that also has quite a few drawbacks.
Not the least of which is that what you're describing isn't a functional religion at all. It's just "fuck it I do whatever I want" with extra steps.
And as I've said repeatedly, if you're just doing whatever you please, that's a far cry from Christianity.
But they have no power
Only one of those two things is spewing out instance after instance of female "ministers" to infiltrate and corrupt. For whatever other doctrinal problems I have with them, both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox church are not that far gone by a long shot.
I'd argue the exact opposite. Churches are corrupted by failing to gatekeep bad actors, something a scattered organization expressly can not do.
The Roman Catholic Church certainly failed to do so as well in the past century, but as a structure is certainly capable of actually doing so. It certainly has in the past to good effect.
On what planet is it easier to gatekeep a larger organization than a smaller one? If a small one gets corrupted it is quite simple to rectify or start a new one. And the consequences of the gathering of power when it is inevitably corrupted are always worse the larger it is. The catholic organization is not even a church, it is a government.
And the last hundred years? Try the last thousand at least - do you even know why the schism happened? Corruption has been the mission statement for the catholic church for centuries. They were quite literally selling sin tickets - "indulgences". Pay the church X and you're pre-forgiven for sins.
The pope has always been a heretic because the office of the pope acting as if it is the will of god and stepping between man and god is heresy.
The planet where we're talking about a whole ass religion. Protestantism has the fatal flaw that they don't gatekeep anything, you are one if you say you are.
That is the flaw of decentralization. Even the Orthodox guys have a pontiff. Protestantism is either totally disorganized or else democracy posing as a religion.
Oh and lastly, indulgences from hundreds of years ago bother you so much but literally voting this very year to declare huge chunks of the Bible invalid is cool? I can't imagine you find that theologically sound.
What you're missing is that the decisions of some council of faggots hold no weight - they have no power, no authority over any other church. Probably within 5 miles of those faggots and their heresy there's another functional church. No faggots can dictate terms and conditions to the other churches, unlike the catholics.
My comment about indulgences was referring to your pretense that the catholic church has only recently been corrupt. They have always been. These godless larping methodists are clearly just as bad, but they have no power.
I understand it perfectly well. You're failing to understand why that also has quite a few drawbacks.
Not the least of which is that what you're describing isn't a functional religion at all. It's just "fuck it I do whatever I want" with extra steps.
And as I've said repeatedly, if you're just doing whatever you please, that's a far cry from Christianity.
Only one of those two things is spewing out instance after instance of female "ministers" to infiltrate and corrupt. For whatever other doctrinal problems I have with them, both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox church are not that far gone by a long shot.