Talk:Catharism/Archive 2

text from Albigensians (sic)
I merged the two documents, per the suggestion. Please check this but I dont think anything was left out from the move.

Albigensians (French: Albigeois) literally means the inhabitants of Albi, a city in southern France. However, the term was used to refer to the later followers of Catharism, a Gnostic-like religious movement of southern France in the 12th and 13th century. The name originates from the end of the 12th century, and was used in 1181 by the chronicler Geoffroy du Breuil of Vigeois. The name is somewhat misleading as the center of the religious movement was really Toulouse. Early Catharism was much more associated with Gnostic theologies that it inherited from its association with the Paulicianism and Bogomils. However, as one historian phrased it, as time proceeded they became more and more like orthodox Christians. When the term "Albigensians" or "Albigensian Crusades" are used they are usually referring to these later Cathars which were a branch of the earlier sect. They believed that the principles of good and evil continually oppose each other in the world. The Albigenses opposed marriage, bearing children (because they thought bringing life into the world to be a sin), and eating meat. Their enemies claimed they advocated suicide,when in reality they only advocated the voluntary cessation of food by those already close to death  (so that when they died, they would have little taint on them and be free of Earthly desires). In the 12th century the church declared them heretics. In the years that followed the Crusades and Inquisitions against them, they slowly dissolved, and by the 15th century they had completely disappeared as a sect. By the time Pope Innocent III came to power in 1198, he had resolved to suppress the Cathari. There followed over forty years of war against the indigenous population. During this period some 500,000 Languedoc men women and children were massacred. However many of the Albigensians, who as previously stated came closer and closer to identifying with orthodox Christianity, merged with the Waldensians prior to their sect being wiped out in the inquisitions. The Albigensians left their mark on the Waldensian movement which is evident in the Waldensian theology and customs. The Waldensian movement was opposed to the early Cathar movement but was known to work side by side with the Albigensians.

Thanks. Dominick (TALK) 14:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Section: Claims of groups to Cathari lineage
If it stays we need to fill in citation needed templates. Please get on board! If we don't fill in the citation needed templates then we need to excise the section. We need good reference, not websites created by a group. Dominick (TALK) 15:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I asked for reference for what is up there. Without going into drama that does not belong here, is there verfiable references for that material? Consult Wiki-verifiability before filling in the references. Dominick (TALK) 15:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

There are some references to the necessity of a direct succession of consolamentum in "The Yellow Cross" by Rene' Weis and also in "The Cathars" by Sean Martin which I could put up if we decide to keep this section. Succession was a major doctrine of most all the sects of that time. Waldensians claimed and made much of it as did the Albigensians. Of course this was necessary in order for them to claim to have as much legitamacy as the Roman Catholic Church which had Apostolic succession which was a core doctrine (and still is)of the Church. I am very aware of the Hamilton Smith case but have been unable to find any verifications to cite. As far as citing hoaxes this would be more or less personal opinion unless verified by court documents. For right now I would suggest that the second sentence .."Their basic tenant of faith declared"....down to the next to the last sentence ..."and baptism of the Holy Spirit all in one" be moved to the above section "Consolamentum"  and the rest deleted for time being. CW


 * I can't find where "direct succession of consolamentum" is a concept, just the rite as the only sacrament. Thats why I flagged it for a citation. CW, was this in French or Burgundian? Dominick (TALK) 19:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Succession (the coming of one person OR thing after another in order, sequence, or in the course of events. Web.) is obvious in the rite partially quoted in the article "this holy baptism...which the Church of God has preserved from the time of the apostles until this time and it has passed from Good Men To Good Men until the present moment, and will continue to do so until the end of the world" (The Cathars: The Most Successful Heresy of the Middle Ages,by Sean Martin, Thunder's Mouth Press, NY, NY, 2004, ISBN# 1-56025-674-5). You can't get much more successional then this. It is recorded in "The Yellow Cross" by Rene' Weis (published by Penguin Books Ltd, 80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL. England, printed 2000, ISBN # 0-140-27669-6) that one of the Parfait suddenly fell into a sin (or came to a bad end) thus nullifying the consolmentum of every person he had ever consoled and every person they in turn had consoled. There was a wild scramble to locate a Bishop to reconsole them all. They finally ended up being consoled by a Bogomile Bishop. If you read the source material, which is in the records of the Inquisition, the Roman priests would ask the Waldensian or the Albigensian how he could have spiritual authority if he was not ordained in the Apostolic succession as the Roman Catholic Church had and which Irenaeus and early Church fathers said was essential. Their reply was they had it from a different source. The Waldensians claimed a group from the days of Sylvester split off from the mother group and hid in the Waldensian mountains maintaining a pure succession. The Cathari claimed thiers streched back to the original apostles and had been handed down from "Good Men to Good Men"  from "the time of the Apostles". Consolamentum was both their Ordination (consecration), absolution, baptismal regeneration, and their baptism in the Holy Spirit. It was their ONLY rite. CW

Perhaps there may be some misunderstanding of Apostolic Succession? CW

No misunderstanding. I am trying to verify the sources. Succession as passed from the apostles is one thing, that is easy. I need a source that any wikipedian can see and verify. Consolamentum as descented is the wrinkle I am trying to validate. Dominick (TALK) 00:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Links to Mani and Buddha?
I have read repeatedly that Catharism is rooted in Manichaeism but I did not see it mentioned in the article. Also, did any branch of the Cathar movement acknowledge Buddha as a saint or prophet? I know that Manichaeism acknowledged both Christ and Buddha. Piercetp 06:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

All references to Cathari links to Manichaeism is pure speculation. The link is made by comparing similiar Gnostic tendencies that both groups had in common Even references stating that Cathari had their roots in Bogomilism is speculation (Although both groups later shared consomamentum and attended each others council. Then again so did Cathari and Waldensians). It is certain these groups affected each other in doctrine and governmental structures but then again both Catholics and Protestants have all been affected by the Cathari and still carry faint traces of that effect to this very day.(See article on Consolamentum). One thing that is often overlooked is that Cathari roots most probably can be traced back to the Paulicians in Armenia (Gibbons) which can be traced back to the Samosatenes and Montanists. Thinking along this line seems to verify the Cathars claims to having a succession of consolamentum that could theoretically date back to the original Church.

CW


 * But are there any links between Catharism and Buddhism? Piercetp 07:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes and no.

There are indirect links by absorption but not a direct successional link. What I mean by this is their were those that were Buddhists in theology (we will call it that) that were Manichaens and these were absorbed by Bogomiles and Cathari. However there was no direct "church succession". Of course there are those that would not agree with me but this is what I hold to be true. From what I have studied the Paulicians enentually had to move into the area of the Bogomiles and lived side by side with them while all the time slowly picking up a lot of these gnostic ideas. These Paulicians came to France and became what were called Cathari. Contrary to what many people believe the paulicians of Armenia were NOT gnostics. Fredrick Coneybear discovered a manuscript which was written by the early Paulicians (9th centurish?) and translated it and it was very orthodox christianity. The manuscript was called "The Key of Truth" and can be purchased from only one publisher and that is Alibris. It is VERY informative reading. CW

Question for CW
You seem to have a lot of insite on the subject of Gnosticism, Dualism and other religious subjects. Some time ago I created the article on Order of Nazorean Essenes. They appear to be a church trying to revive Manichaeism. They do have a brilliant website, I must say. But otherwise I know little about them. Do you know if this group is really on the level? Piercetp

I am afraid that I must hesitate right now before making any statements about this group. Although I am well familiar with them I do not want to make a comment either positive or negative.

Since you yourself have some familiarity with Gnosticism are you aware of recent conspiracy theory concerning the RFID chips and the DaVinci code? I have been addressing this elsewhere on the web for some time now. Alledgedly the government has been slowly preparing the public for receiving an ID chip which they say is best implanted in the right hand or above the right eyebrow. Many in the military now have this chip and many pets are being implanted with it. Such a method could theoretically replace money as it could take the place of debit and credit cards. It would also solve the issue of missimg persons, etc. as was discussed on the Oprah Winfrey program. There are already RFID chips in the clothing and merchandise we buy and many fear it may be a breach of privacy. Many Christian fundamentalists are loudly crying out against it due to a reference to a "mark" that is mentioned in the Apocalypse. Alledgedly the government is somehow backing adherents of the DaVinci code and are also backing large well established fraternities with Gnostic tendencies that in turn support the DaVinci code. The theory is if enough people can be persuaded that the basic structure of Christianity cannot be trusted then  the introduction of this chip so feared by literalists can be more easily integrated into our social structure. It is claimed it was produced to counteract the huge success of "The Passion of the Christ" by Mel Gibson. In my opinion the DaVinci code is one of the worst hodge podges of inaccurate and mythical histories ever devised. It is pure foolishness. There are some roots of this theory that originated in some Gnostic circles (I am NOT referring to a modern group I previously have been writng about) in the distant past. Are you aware of where this theory originated from? CW


 * Not entirely. I do have an interest in the subject of the "DaVinci code" but I never bothered to study it in detail. I have listened to several guests of George Noory talk about it. I think its really a lot of sensationalism for the sake of entertainment. Though the belief that Christ was married and fathered children can be found in several religious traditions. Piercetp 06:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

CW/deb mail
Sent to me, please send future communications on my talk page or this page

''
 * Thank you for your message. Truth be told, we have never added or edited anything on that page until recently as the log will show. Nor do we have a particular interest in doing so. I do have concerns about unreferenced remarks and the lack of clear citations and hope that you will address this promptly. For example, there is no evidence of this **** person or his alleged religious body. If there was such a person and he made statements under oath there would be transcripts. court records and an indication of a police investigation.


 * As for the drama, that is not our style either. We are plain spoken, Amish like folks. (CW) has written to say that was sorry about his remarks and stated his intention to remove all posted items which have no basis in fact and are indeed defamatory. As pacifists we could not file a civil action and must trust that (CW) will keep his promise according to the Christian spirit he espouses. For our part, we do not apologize for undertaking the due diligence that proper stewardship requires. All of our actions were morally and legally appropriate.


 * I do find it odd that a partisan Roman Catholic as yourself should be the de facto guardian of the Cathar page on Wikipedia lol. But you seem to have edited it well. You may recall writing us at the old website several years ago.''

Do not find it odd. I intend to excise the modern section because nobody seems to have any reference except the mysterious CW who your mysterious group of computer using "Amish" are fighting. I find it extremly odd that someone who are like "Amish folks" would find the time to use a computer. I think the hoax CW alluded to, and subsequent allegations make it clear this is a fabrication. "AGCWeb" anything not posted here or on my talk page shall be ignored. Dominick (TALK) 19:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I apologize.. I misread the above letter before I wrote the one below. I quickly scanned over the above letter and thought ALL the contents of the above was written by the AGC and posted by them. CW

You have BLAMED CW for the Smith reference without "verification". I am aware of the case but if I wanted I could cite the verifiable case of Paul Jones in Oralville Ohio. Also WHAT in the world does either the Smith case or the Jones case have to do with the AGC? No one ever said nor even hinted any connection to them whatsoever. There are plenty of Protestant and Catholic oriented Cults being written about and you don't hear the Protestants and Catholics bellyaching about it. If CW wanted to he could have quoted recorded conversations with the AGC without apology or the well documented case of Cathar sexual abuse such as that of Fornier against Beatrice (1290's to 1300's) recorded in "The Yellow Cross" by Rene' Weis. As for CW being mysterious I don't see anyone else posting their real name here and the one time I did ended up being diasterious. Someone alledging to be in the group abovementioned got into my private emails and also got telephone numbers of organizational ministers and Bishops (from the organizations web page)) that I for years had associated with and called them up leaving question on my character and planting lies in an obvious retaliatory act. This reprehensible act has resulted in unrepairable damage and has caused personal harm as well as financial loss due to affecting my work in these circles and those they associate with. If you want verification I have verification of individuals that will testify in court and believe me I will not hesitate one moment to blast out of the water anyone involved in a personal assasination attempt against my character. I have been on the phone all day dealing with the damage incurred by this act and I am NOT going to treat it lightly. Originally I responded to a question in this forum about a certain group and I related my bad experience with them. I was NOT the one the used the word hoax concerning them. Their response forced me into a position of defending myself. I refered to the name of the group but at no time did I stoop so low as to mention personal names or to call up their associates. I am tired of this drivel constantly being spewed back up and forcing me to defend myself on a forum that should be used for encyclepedic purposes. The next time I write on this subject will be the last word on it and at that time I will verify indeed who made those calls and I will also give my final verdict as to whether these people are a dangeous cult, a few pranksters, or a legitamate group and I will stand by my findings and will make them known not only on this little talk forum but on a much more substantial platform. At that time I will deliver my final word on the subject. CW

I believe the point here is the lack of clear verifiable citations. A case in point is the reference to Jacques Fournier against Béatrice de Planissoles in 1320. It is indeed well documented as Bishop Fournier was a very exacting Inquisitor. Therefore, the historical references and citations abound. For one scholarly translation of her deposition

Other references: Fournier, Jacques, Le Registre d'Inquisition de Jacques Fournier, evêque de Pamiers (1318-1325), Latin manuscript no. 4030 in the Vatican Library, edited by Jean Duvernoy, Toulouse, 1965, 3 vols. (in Latin)

Fournier, Jacques, Le Registre d'Inquisition de Jacques Fournier (Evêque de Pamiers) 1318-1325, traduit et annoté par Jean Duvernoy, Préface de Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Centre de Recherches Historiques, Civilisations et Sociétés 43, (Paris: Mouton, 1978) 3 vols. (in French)

Ladurie, Emmanuel LeRoy. Montaillou: The Promised Land of Error, trans. by Barbara Bray. (New York: Vintage Books, 1979).

Ladurie, Emmanuel Le Roy. Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 à 1324. (Paris: Editions Gallimard, 1975).

Dominick if you have questions, feel free to ask them of us first and then if not satisfied with the answer post accordingly in public. You find it odd that "Amish like folk" would find the time to use a computer. Not entirely. We do have people in the cities and we have various ministries e.g. prison, sanctuary movement, that require modern communications. Second, the use of computers is maintained in a manner consistent with our principles of separation. The AGC at one point as a revenue source did publish online and hardcopy Christian directories and scholarly journals at a discount rate.

As to our relationship with Wikipedia, it seems an ongoing presence is required, at least on a short term basis, and we hope to be faithful contributors, adhering to the practices and protocols in postings and editings in a non partisan, non inflammatory way.

Traditional Cathar belief held that sex within marriage was sinful because of the potential for reproduction which would further the growth of the material world created by the evil god. It is reported, however, that sex outside of marriage with one NOT ones spouse or with concubines WAS permissable. Raymond Roussell, before the 1280's, had been convicted of CATHAR heresy and sentenced to the wearing of the Cathar Yellow Cross. He desired to have sex with Beatrice. Beatrice is recorded as saying, "I was asleep when Raymond emerged from under my bed, lay next to me in his nightshirt, and started to act in a manner which suggested he desired to have sex with me...I said to him, 'Now I see clearly that the intention behind your feigned words about going to join the Good Christians (Cathars) was only to possess me and have sex with me' ".(pg 43. The Yellow Cross, Weis). Raymonds cousin, Pierre Clergue, explained to Beatrice, "It is indeed greater sin to have intercourse with a husband, because the wife is not conscious of sinning during sex witrh her husband....married sex is more serious than sex with another man".(pg 55, The Yellow Cross, Weis)   Raymond Delaire "also confessed to having viewed incest as free from sin during his time as as Cathar"(pg 57, Yellow Cross, Weis). I further quote " The most treacherous CATHAR of the Authie' era, it turned out, was none other than [Fournier]..and at the time of Fournier's interview with Beatrice de Planisolles he had never been challenged, let alone arrested. Beatrice knew him well. Indeed, like many other woman she had been his lover"(pg 7, The Yellow Cross, Weis) There are many other references but this should suffice in showing I quoted not in error. CW

Drama
There is need for me to defend myself against an article that publically used my name and released private information about meon another web site. This article written by certain persons claims I contacted them for credentials. This is not true. There evidently has been some misunderstanding.I contacted them asking how they know they have succession to a certain religious rite. I am writng a book on Church history and was trying to authenticate the rumor that this certain rite still existed. I apologise I was not completely honest with them by not divulging  this information with them and they most probably thought I was  interested in their church. I was afraid if I told them I was writing a book I would get no information. At NO time did I ask for credentials and this misinformation evidently came from the fact that the man I was communicating with had a very poor command of English. Several of my former and present colleagues were called (according to their article) "to check his authenticity". However my colleagues tell me that whoever called tried to plant questions in their minds about me and slander me. It is claimed that my colleagues reported that at one time I was a very great and influential man but became bitter and isolated myself. My colleagues deny saying ANY of the above. The truth is at one time I traveled abroad and was very well known but I pulled off of the field in order to establish a local work (which is TREMENDOUSLY SUCCESSFUL I might add). I am NOT bitter and isolated but I have MANY close colleagues and associates both in the feild of Mental Health (which is my secular occupation) and in the Religious world. I have had MUCH more success being in a stable location then I did traveling all over the United States and over 30 different countries. Just last month I was invited to speak before a crowd of over four thousand people and isolated, bitter people are not invited to be trusted with such crowds. Whoever called my house did not offer me a church home (why would I need that when I have my hands full taking care of the two I already have?) What I WAS told was  "we are giving you an offer, someone is coming tomorrow to your door to take you to a safe place".(?) This call was followed by another call that I won't relate here. I have no need to seek credentials. I have all the credentials I will ever need and have had them since 1977 and I certainly would not seek them from a group so diametrically OPPOSITE of what I believe. I am ACTS 2;38, One God, Christ centered, and holiness standard ALL THE WAY!!! Without shame or apology!! I could never, would never, uphold Gnostic views. I respect the right of others to believe as they wish but I would NOT seek credentials with anyone that believed other then as I believe.I do not mean that as a slur, for I am sure they would feel the same way about me. Everyone has to seek out his own souls salvation and I respect that. This article also publishes to the public that anyone that wants the private information they have dug up about me that they can write in and they will send it to them. I am sure there is some reason other then vengence and personal attack that they would offer my private information to the public. I hope they do not think that while they have been gathering private information on me that I have been stupid enough to set on my hands and not gather some juicy information on them both as individuals and as a group. So far I have NOT one time personally mentioned anyone. I have so far not revealed any ones private past. I have only commented on a web page that is put up for public viewing and analysis. No I am not ashamed of my private past but I feel I have rights to a private life and if that is not honored then I will not honor the private lives of those I have been forced to run informmation on. With the colorful information and scandel as well as claims of things nonexistant that I know of concerning various groups and persons would be enough to start my own juicy web page. I have media contacts I very well could utilise. But I have too big of a responsibility to keep things running around here then to chase after these things. This whole thing began with my publication of the RFID chips and the government/gnostic connection. I also was gathering info for an expose' on Internet cults. Then as I looked for info for my book and it was discovered who I was it raised up red flags like crazy. I can understand that. But I think most of this is a misunderstanding.Most of the misunderstanding has come from communicating with someone with a poor command of English. I have tried not to slander anyone with this paragraph but felt it to be essential that I clear up some things. I am sure that anyone else in my position would do the same. Hopefully after conversing with some individuals about this situation we can cordially and mutually stop all this freaking idiotic nonsense. CW

We have exercised restraint in this matter and an examination of the chronological record will support that. We have made no defamatory statements, simply a short statement of defence against a bewildering onslaught of emails and public postings from CW at this site and elsewhere.

The webpage you mention does not offer information to anyone. What is says is: "Should any person with authentic, evidenced need require access to our source material in the above matter, specifically referrals to his former church officials, we could oblige if the request comes from an attorney or competent authority... Any external examination of our conduct will show that we used due diligence and we believe our actions to be morally and legally correct."

When we send emails, we use a commercial email notification product that verifies our emails are authentic and received by the intended party. Perhaps you should try such a service if you have concerns that someone is tampering with your emails.

We have several times insisted that to ensure a stable means of communication your attorney or competent authority in your church contact us so we can sort through the various statements and assertions you have put forward in the public domain. For our part, we stand by all our communications; public and private.

To date, you have refused and continue to use this forum which we think is wholly inappropriate, demeaning to yourself, defamatory to the AGC and quite frankly, a sad waste of time for users who wish to engage in meaningful discussion about the article in question. Agcweb

Obviously the above drivel could continue forever and is a waste of time. I think it may be time to turn our attention to the subject of this article. The article on Cathar does NOT touch the surface as to what Cathars really believe. My above post concerning Beatrice is one aspect not covered in the article. I am compiling some verifiable information that may or may not be added to the article. CW

Hello, I stumbled across this talk page today and I do know something about the AGC. After reading a popular novel mentioning Cathars I did a google search and found the Assembly of Good Christians. I wrote asking if they had churches in my area. They said they were very exclusive as to who they gave information out to and needed some verification as to who I was. Like an idiot I gave them references. They wrote back and told me I didn't qualify. QUALIFY? I became outraged and wrote them back. Big mistake. They called every reference I gave them and made insinuating and leading remarks that hurt my character. I wrote them again. This time they sent suposed copys of my letters to my references but they were not my letters. Part of it was mine but they added things to it. My e-mail adress was even on the letters. Almost identical to what happed to someone else who has written in. This seems to be there method. How did they do this? To make a long story short investigation showed that the AGC consists of only 4 individuals that are pretending to be some large operation. There are substantial rumors that at least one of them have more then once met with females and then fed them the line about sex marriage being sin but not being sin with a Cathar (Good Christian). It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out something is fishy here. Look, They report 85% have no telephones. 95% have no automobiles. They are Amish-like and "generally" they "have no electricity in their homes" (taken from their site) Yet almost half of them (42%) have computers and inter-net. What's wrong with this picture? If they know how to run computers without electricity they should share the secret with the rest of it. Oh but that would probably be as secret as everything else about them. They hide their membership statisics (which is a big 4) and hide the where abouts of all their churches. Just try and find just one of them. And yet they say they are "transperent". People everyday write things against big church operations and the operations run on as usual. But these guys have completly rewritten their web-sight, written an article their about the CW , and have been chasing every thing this CW has written. What does that tell you when one person has the power to shake the whole operation..must not be much of an operation. Someone should write a separate article somewhere warning people about the Fab Four and their doctrine on sex. They should not be allowed on the inter-net. My advice to you CW (if indeed there really is a CW and not one of the fab four which is just seeking to stir up publicity) would be to call a truce with these scoundrals and if that don't work you had better get an atturny. I have had experience with them and believe me they will not stop. Deb

I wrote the Assembly of Good Christians and received back a very friendly and informative response. If I understand our correspondences correctly in the next few days or weeks I will have enough information to come back to this forum and give my final word as to whether the AGC is a hoax carried out by a few, a dangerous cult, or a legitamate group. This may or may not include visiting their church headquaters in Canada. This of course will consist mostly of my own opinion but since I have had more personal contact with the AGC then anyone else on this forum and I have been educated in the area of cultism I feel it will be a well qualified opinion. As far as I am concerned at that point the debate will be OVER and need never be referred to again and we can get back to the true purpose this forum was created for. CW

CW did call the Assembly of Good Christians and was very dishonest inasmuch as he wrote in such a way as to lead us to believe he was seeking membership when in reality he was seeking information to use against us in one of the two books he is writing on cults (of which the AGC are NOT). This action alone should speak loudly of his character. When we perceived he meant to do us evil he was asked not to write back. We then saw his reply to someone on this talk page asking about the AGC. His answer was very damaging. He had previously told us the group he had been involved with in the past so we contacted the officials of these groups to find out what CW was all about. We talked to a couple of officials in the groups he belonged to and simply asked for references. These men poured out a slew of unsolicited information and told us CW at one time was a great man but he became legalistic in doctrine by emphasing what people wore on the outside as opposed to the inward heart. Because of his radical views on extreme holiness standard he caused himself to become isolated from all these groups. His isolation turned into bitterness. The AGC is a group of Cathars and we make no apology for that fact. We do not believe in CW's anti-Trinitarian doctrine of the Jesus Only teaching( traditionally accepted as heresy and unbiblical by most standards) but we respect his right to believe it. We in turn expect him to allow us to believe as we believe. Cathars are traditionally Gnostic and we cherish our beliefs just the same as he cherishes his. I am not authorised to speak for the whole AGC for I am only an elder in one of the many house churches under the AGC banner. But this is the general feeling among us. CW feels his dontrine is the only one right and slams our teaching and our group and I ask you to be the judge if indeed this is true Christian behavior. CW has written us saying he has checked us out more closly and now feels we are not the dangerous member recruiting cult that he originally perceived us to be. We wish him peace. T.C. (moved Dominick (TALK) 15:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC))

The posting from T.C. is not an authentic statement from anyone associated with the AGC. It is an invention. Agcweb (TALK)

Allright CW You said you were going to give your final verdict on the AGC. I see they have put some stuff up about you on their site. Go look at it. What is your last word you promised? Deb (moved Dominick (TALK) 15:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC))

There are letters being circulated THAT I DID NOT WRITE! They have my email address on them but are totally fraudulent. CW (moved Dominick (TALK) 15:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC))

I promised to leave my final word concerning the AGC and I shall. I stand firm as an Apostolic Christian and I do not, never have, and never shall accept the teachings of the Assembly of Good Christians because of personal doctrinal differences. However I will respect the right of the AGC to believe as they wish and I am not the judge of any person. I sought information from them for a book I was writing. I did not divulge the reason for my inquiry because I was afraid they would not give me the information I needed. I was dishonest in my approach. When they perceived my intentions words were exchanged, push turned to shove, and the whole situation slowly snowballed. My original perception of these people were that of a member recruiting cult. I have since discovered they are far from member recruiting anyone and just simply wish to exist as a community in peace. I have also recently recieved information that gives me reason to believe that the phone calls and other forms of harrassmnet is coming from another group and not the AGC. Although I have never met anyone from the AGC I know someone who has and he assures me there are many of them and several communities of them. I do not apologise for my personal beliefs but I do apologize publically for the spirit in which I approached this whole thing. It was not Christian and I was wrong. While I can attack a doctrine of an individual I never have a right to personally attack that individual himself. In doing so I would never win him to my side any way. Even if I won I would lose. I have been communicating with an individual from the AGC that has been very friendly, kind, and has more then gone out of his way to bring peace to this situation. I ask that we mutually forgive and put this all behind us as Christ taught us to do. I extend my love to all whom I have hurt. CW (moved Dominick (TALK) 16:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC))

The kind words of apology from CW while appreciated, are unnecessary from our perspective. People are protected in uttering good faith statements. Allegations that fall under civil or criminal libel are not so protected and have the potential to place not only ourselves, but the whole Wikipedia project under disrepute. We ask only that these statements be removed in their entirety. Once that is accomplished, we ask CW to remove his apology. When both are achieved, we will remove this current statement. Then all should be back to the primary focus; the Cathar article, written with proper citations.

As a gesture of good faith from the AGC to the community that reviews and edit this article, we have an idea. Over the course of decades we have had cause to consult or be consulted by several independent medieval scholars. We will write some asking if any would be interested in making themselves available as a scholarly resource for the regular editors of this page. This could be a positive contribution. Since some of these scholars have visited our archival office in the past, this may address other concerns as well. lol.

Agcweb (TALK)

Please don't add dashes between entries. If a reference is added it must be verifiable. Original research is not allowed. I have no idea where you archival offices would be, but no person had ever heard of you, even among the cult awareness groups. This is about the medieval sect, and it alone. No group had provided any references that there is any link to this group except wishful thinking. In checking on my own, references given here didn't jibe with the reading of texts I can get, and when I had asked an independent scholar about some of the references and claims, there was some astonishment. If you have a reference, please provide them as I asked. This whole line in the drama section isn't about this article. If I may gently suggest, maybe you all should take this to some other forum. Dominick (TALK) 17:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

DOMINICK. As the title so plainly says this has been a Drama of a personal misunderstanding and poor communication between two groups of people. Things were said in anger and are now trying to be laid to rest. Since this Talk page is for the Cathar article I see no reason why any reference I or the AGC have made need remain. We have both agreed to seek to have this all edited (except for my apology which I would like to remain for awhile).I have tried to edit it myself but it keeps coming back. What is the procedure? CW


 * There is no procedure. I asked an admin and it is to remain. Dominick (TALK) 19:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Who is the administrator? How do I contact him?

=Question=

I have been told that once something is written on this talk page that it will stay there for years and can be brought up in Google searches for years    I have reason to believe that in the past someone may have used my husbands name in a dispute to damage someone else     This means there are falsehoods somewhere in the system involving my husband as well as the person that was attacked Certainly there MUST be SOME way to get this kind of stuff permanently erased if we can prove this was falsely done      Is there? Thank you     Miss Bec

Speaking about falsehoods the fiction written above by Deb is a prime example. I am not AGC but I KNOW them. I was writing an article some years back and I interviewed them and I can tell you all you want to know about the AGC. Deb is dreaming. Evidently suffering from sexual repression resulting in the present delusion. DON


 * Gosh. What a lot of people spouting a lot of vague accusations about an obscure outfit - plus nonsense about governments putting chips in our heads. Please stick to the topic. Miss Bec, libelous material can be permanently deleted from the record, but a simple deletion from the current page will exclude it from Google searches. However, you must identify the passage first. DON et al, please refrain from personal attacks.

Paul B 09:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I hate to add to the confusion but there are two CW's that have been writing. I agree, Paul lets stick to the subject. CW

The other CW is permenantly off here. Take it over CW. Sorry. CW

=CONSOLAMENTUM= The Apostolic succession was of utmost importance to the Roman Catholic Church. Several of the early Church fathers such as Clement, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Cyprian,and others all attested to the necessity of succession. Although somewhat different then the type of succession that the Roman Church eventually embraced nevertheless it was an integral part of the doctrinal structure during the time of the Albigensians. The Waldensians found it necessary to construct a history of succession by affirming that there were those hid in the mountains of Italy that secretly had preserved a non-Roman succession. Look through the records of the Inquisition and consistantly the Waldensians and the Cathari were asked how they could minister without a succession. The rite of consolamentum says it was handed down from Good Men to Good Men from the Apostles and will continue to do so until the end of time. THIS is succession. CW
 * I checked sources and I don't have anything thatverifies this. Dominick (TALK) 16:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

In the Occitan version of the Consolamentum used during the late 1200's as the elder consoled the recipient he said," [Name of believer], you wish to recieve the spiritual baptism by which the Holy Spirit is given in the Church of God, together with the Holy Prayer and the IMPOSITION OF HANDS by Good Men. This holy baptism, by which the Holy Spirit is given, the Church of God has PRESERVED FROM THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES until this present time and IT HAS PASSED FROM GOOD MEN TO GOOD MEN until the present moment, and it will continue to do so until the end of the world." (The Cathars, Sean Martin, pg. 57, ISBN# 1-56025-647-5) If this imposition of laying on of hands which was preserved from the time of the Apostles by being passed from Good men to Good men is not Succession then what is? It can be no plainer then this. "Cathar's claim that they were decended from the time of the Apostles" (pg. 51). When the last Parfait (those that had received consolamentum ) had been killed it is said that "there were to be no more consolings, or Holy Baptisms , as the ritual which the Cathars believed had come down to them from the time of the apostles until this time and passed from Good Men to Good Men until the present and will continue unto the end of the world...Now that there were no more Good Men left, it seemed the end of the world had truly come." (pg 138) Some historians feel the need of Cathars to prove an unbroken chain of consolamentum fom the time of the Apostles was created because of the fact that the Catholic Church had such a succession and Cathari needed it in return to prove their legitamacy since succession was the prevailing doctrine of the day. CW


 * I checked some other sources and they did not claim that, but did say the Church tried to prove otherwise, as they did not want a line of succession. As far as AGC, this isn't the topic of this article. Nothing I have found matches with verifiable facts. It still rates high on my hoax scale. Dominick (TALK) 11:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)