Was the Reformation an Experiment gone wrong?

[Root of Jesse]

Really?

Here ya go. For your perusal.

The problem I have, and that the Catholic Church has with this document, is that the premise of it is false.

The Church was already changing those things it felt needed to be reformed. Luther, as a Catholic priest, didn't really have the right to protest this way.

Regarding indulgences, the Catholic Church never sold indulgences. It neither could do it, nor did it do it.

 

[athenken]

Root of Jesse, it is rather unfortunate that you are choosing to keep your head in the sand on these issues. While at the time putting words in the mouth of a highly respected Reformer. To assume that the Catholic Church was doing nothing wrong throughout the middle ages through to the Renaissance is really naive. Leaders in the RCC were behind some major atrocities throughout history.

 

[Root of Jesse]

And what level should he have been directing it, I wonder?

Tetzel, and the Archbishop. Like many other things, the Pope gave a vision-he needed more money to continue St. Peter's. He offered blessings, indulgences, to people who made donations. He sent people, legates, out to collect money. Some did it the wrong way. The Church never sold indulgences.

 

[Root of Jesse]

How so?

You guys are "Bible alone". Show it in the Bible. Where does it say you must have a personal relationship with Christ? Where does it say to gather the unbelievers at the altar and faith-heal them?

 

[Root of Jesse]

Root of Jesse, it is rather unfortunate that you are choosing to keep your head in the sand on these issues. While at the time putting words in the mouth of a highly respected Reformer. To assume that the Catholic Church was doing nothing wrong throughout the middle ages through to the Renaissance is really naive. Leaders in the RCC were behind some major atrocities throughout history.

Well, who's putting words in whose mouth? I never said the Church didn't do anything wrong. I said they were already in process of reforming. Luther was a few years late. Change takes time.

What atrocities, might I ask, are you asking about? (Shall I guess...the Crusades, the Inquisition... any more?) Catholics also instituted the hospital system, the university system, the legal system, the elementary school systems. They kept medicine, scientific discovery, and literature, and life in general alive while the Huns and Vandals and their ilk were raping Europe.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Regarding the Crusades, what is your understanding of them?

Regarding the Inquisition, what is your understanding of them?

The above is your homework. I'm leaving on vacation tomorrow, and not taking a computer with me. God love you all.

 

[athenken]

Tetzel, and the Archbishop. Like many other things, the Pope gave a vision-he needed more money to continue St. Peter's. He offered blessings, indulgences, to people who made donations. He sent people, legates, out to collect money. Some did it the wrong way. The Church never sold indulgences.

What do you mean by "offered indulgences?" It appears that you contradicting yourself here.

What is the purpose of an "indulgence?"

 

[Root of Jesse]

What do you mean by "offered indulgences?" It appears that you contradicting yourself here.

What is the purpose of an "indulgence?"

Looks like you might want to find out, hmmm? I'll give you a start. An indulgence is a release from temporal punishment by doing some pious act. For example, some parish missions during lent give an indulgance if you attend all days of the mission, go to confession shortly after, do the penance required, repent from all your sins, and do some corporal or spiritual work of mercy. You can do this for another person or for yourself, and that person can be dead, and believed to be in purgatory.

Now, go see what an indulgence is, and see that you could never buy an indulgence, though some representative(s) of the pope said you could (they were wrong), and knowing what an indulgence is, that you cant get the indulgence before you commit a sin.

 

[athenken]

Looks like you might want to find out, hmmm? I'll give you a start. An indulgence is a release from temporal punishment by doing some pious act. For example, some parish missions during lent give an indulgance if you attend all days of the mission, go to confession shortly after, do the penance required, repent from all your sins, and do some corporal or spiritual work of mercy. You can do this for another person or for yourself, and that person can be dead, and believed to be in purgatory.

Now, go see what an indulgence is, and see that you could never buy an indulgence, though some representative(s) of the pope said you could (they were wrong), and knowing what an indulgence is, that you cant get the indulgence before you commit a sin.

And where is the scriptural support for this doctrine?

Also, you assert that the RCC was already going through some changes that made what Martin Luther moot, what changes might those be?

 

[Markus6]

You don't know the truth in scripture, because you think you can understand. But like the eunuch in the chariot, you need people to explain scripture for you. The eunuch was reading Isaiah but didn't understand what he was reading. Philip, one of the Apostles, and a bishop, explained it to him.

I'm contemplating joining this thread in a serious manner - but I'll start with a flippant triviality: Philip was a deacon at the time, not a bishop. He was not one of the twelve either if that's what you mean by "apostle".

 

[Incariol]

That's been said about every great reform movement in human history by those who didn't actually know how bad the "Old Order" was.

Yay logical fallacy: Special pleading - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Markus6]

Looks like you might want to find out, hmmm? I'll give you a start. An indulgence is a release from temporal punishment by doing some pious act. For example, some parish missions during lent give an indulgance if you attend all days of the mission, go to confession shortly after, do the penance required, repent from all your sins, and do some corporal or spiritual work of mercy. You can do this for another person or for yourself, and that person can be dead, and believed to be in purgatory.

But in Luther's day one of those good acts was donating money to build St. Peters right? i.e. if I can give money to the Catholic Church I will receive less punishment in purgatory. The difference between that and "selling indulgences" is pretty miniscule!

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Wrong again. Here are some--
................

Communion in both kinds (a key Protestant point during the Reformation)

Women in some roles previous denied them, such as readers, Eucharistic ministers, acolytes.

The liturgy in the language spoken by the people

No more Limbo; Purgatory redefined to make it less terrifying.

Fasting and abstinence rules relaxed substantially.

Clergy from other churches received.

Divorce now acceptable and common (new name: annullment)

Bible study by the people is actually encouraged.

Parish councils made up of laypersons.



Need more examples?

Thousands of deads and wars and more wars for these?
This is nothing. Sorry, you seem to not distinguish the essential from the accesory.
Communion in both Kinds? But you lost it all with your doctrine on the Sacraments and the sacraments. Lost is the word of Christ: This is my Body, this is My Blood. So, you are just drinking wine and bread which is nothing of what we have. You lost the essencial and kept the accessories. Most Protestant Liturgies are like dinners where you sing, dance and talk but do not eat anything....

The mass, said in any language, has the same value. Abroad, I have been to masses in Chinese, Malta Language, Polish, Swedish, Vietnamese. I enjoyed it and I ate the Body of Christ and Drank His Blood which is the essencial.

Sincerely, if that is all Reformation was about, God, so many dead people for empty air...

Boy, what you lost on the way is incommenrably more extense...

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Oh, baloney on your both kinds. You have no understanding of those things. Most of those don't matter either way, not one whit to the faith. And those that do matter, such as Bible study, have always been encouraged, as soon as books were readily available, and cheap. Annullment is nothing like divorce. Divorce means you stop being married. Annullment means you never were married in the eyes of God. The Catholic Church has always received clergy from other faiths after they confess their belief in Catholicism. Limbo was never a doctrine, it was an attempt to explain where unbaptized children go. Purgatory hasn't changed a bit-we believe what the Bible says about it. Liturgy has moved to the vernacular for a very long time. (But it doesn't change a bit what we believe, does it?) When the role of women changed in society, it changed in the church. In the past, women wouldn't ask to do those things. Again, it doesn't signal a move toward Protestantism.

I am dumbfounded by the grounds on Reformation... Boy, what they lost for such little claims...

 

[Rion]

I think it went semi-wrong. I wish Luther had reformed the RCC rather than split from it.

 

[Albion]

I think it went semi-wrong. I wish Luther had reformed the RCC rather than split from it.

Luther DID inform the RCC, both by direct communication to the archbishop and by posting his propositions (theses) in the usual place, calling for an open discussion of the issues. He was excommunicated before he ever had a hearing on them.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Luther DID inform the RCC, both by direct communication to the archbishop and by posting his propositions (theses) in the usual place, calling for an open discussion of the issues. He was excommunicated before he ever had a hearing on them.

In the RCC, there is no such a thing as nailing thesis in the Church door and demanding discussion.
The discussion goes, from the Early times, in Councils, and never heard that a Council was gathered by nailing thesis in a Church Door.
Luther had a chance to retreat. Instead, he went ahead alone and declared his thesis a "dogma" and had LUTHERans with him. It was a Church according to Luther, not the original CHRISTian one.

 

[Albion]

In the RCC, there is no such a thing as nailing thesis in the Church door and demanding discussion.

Apparently there was, because Luther was only following a well-travelled path in posting as he did, and doing so where he did. And of course you want to ignore the fact that Luther wrote to the archbishop. That counts as communicating with the church, if you ask me.

The discussion goes, from the Early times, in Councils, and never heard that a Council was gathered by nailing thesis in a Church Door.

That wasn't the issue. Go back and read what was posted here that I replied to.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Apparently there was, because Luther was only following a well-travelled path in posting as he did, and doing so where he did. And of course you want to ignore the fact that Luther wrote to the archbishop. That counts as communicating with the church, if you ask me.



That wasn't the issue. Go back and read what was posted here that I replied to.

Apparently there was, because Luther was only following a well-travelled path in posting as he did, and doing so where he did. And of course you want to ignore the fact that Luther wrote to the archbishop. That counts as communicating with the church, if you ask me.

Wrong. Councils are not gathered this way. Never were. Name one.

That wasn't the issue. Go back and read what was posted here that I replied to.

I read it. I saw no contradiction.

 

[Albion]

Wrong. Councils are not gathered this way. Never were. Name one.

Wasn't talking about councils there.