Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org (Chris Hedemark)]

Tanner wrote:
> Actually, the Roman Catholic Church (which is what everyone means
> when they say "the Catholic Church" these days) was *not* the
> original church.

Correct.

Churches (note the plural) were independent of one another in the first
century.  Of course there were guys like Peter & Paul running around
making sure that these young babes in Christ were able to get straightened
out when they varied from the right path, but they were ultimately
independent of one another.
>They may claim that Peter was their founder,
> but in fact, one of the various Roman Emporers decided to covert
> to Christianity and marched his entire army through a river and
> declared them baptised.

That would be Constantine, who only flew the cross on his flag in answer
to a vision, but ultimately still maintained his own polytheistic beliefs
with the theory that if he were baptised right before his last breath he'd
go to heaven.
Of course, the roads were lined with the bodies (and parts) of real
Christians who refused to fall in line with Rome.
> Before that, the Romans were doing a
> good job of killing the Christians.  The Roman Catholic Church,
> by virtue of the power of the Roman empire, basically swallowed
> (or killed) all other variations of Christianity (all the while
> changing some of the basic doctrines).

There were independent Christians still around, and it bothered Rome to no
end.  The Anabaptists were particularly bothersome to Rome.
> The original Christian Church was a rather informal thing set up
> by the remaining disciples.  I don't believe any analog of it
> still exists today.

It has adapted over time, but there are some vestiges.

The Mennonites & Amish trace back through the original Anabaptists which
keep going all the way to the 1st Century church.  Each community has its
own Ordnung, which was basically a form of self government by the
independent church community.  I think that the modern Anabaptists went
wrong in two key areas:1) They became as the pharisees, paying too much 
attention to the letter
of the law and missing the spirit of it.2) Centuries of persecution by the 
Roman Catholic Church and later by
others completely wiped out any evangelical tendencies that they once had.
Modern day baptists unfortunately have borrowed a lot of ideas from the
protestants, which unfortunately also carried over a lot of cruft from the
Roman Catholic Church.  Some are still obedient, while others get into
infant baptisms and other non-biblical practices.
There are a number of non-denominational churches around.  Also you will
see a church named something like "So-and-so Christian Church".  They are
not a denomination.  They are fully independent, and don't have any sort
of a conference or anything where all of the "Christian Churches" band
together.  They see only the Bible as authoritative in matters of running
the local church, with no external oversight.
One of the best ones I've found in the Triangle is Liberty Baptist Church
in Durham.  Yes, they are a southern baptist church.  But they clearly
operate independently and only affiliate with the SBC because of
fundamental agreement with their statement of faith.  These folks are
strongly evangelical, and really reach out to all members of the
community.   On any given sunday it is a tossup whether there will be more
anglos or latinos.  They have a fleet of buses going into the poor parts
of Durham, Hillsborough, and almost all the way out to Burlington (with
many waypoints in between).  I think many modern congregations forget the
spirit of service to the local community, and the need to evangelize like
the first century Christians did.