Was the Reformation an Experiment gone wrong?

[Pfaffenhofen]

...and THAT's a play on words. When your church splits, it pretends that one piece, the RCC, isn't broken. In time there are dozen of pieces, but people like you pretend that all but one of them are not pieces.

Any of the Protestant churches could play the same game you're playing (and a few do so) and say, for example, "our church, the Lutheran Episcopal Church--Mexico Synod, is united. Oh yes, some others broke off from us so they're not real Lutherans anymore."

That's all that the game requires.

all but one of them are not pieces

That is correct. It is not only my opinion. That is what it is.

Oh yes, some others broke off from us so they're not real Lutherans anymore.

You may do that if you want.
We do that with Catholics. Our biggest problem is with the guys who are one foot in one foot out. An Irish Bishop asked those people to decide themselves in a remark that I did not agree completely but which is inside Catholic Feeling.

 

[athenken]

RCC is Christ.

It is this kind of arrogance that will prevent the Roman Catholic Church from unifying with the other major denominations of Christianity, including the Eastern Orthodox, the Lutherans, Methodists, Reformers, Baptists (and the list goes on).

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

You can say that, but everyone who is not determined to put a pretty face on a harsh reality knows that there is a great range of belief within the RCC. Just this week, for example, the supporters of Obama's plan to make Catholic hospitals cover birth control expenses for all employees told the bishops that their protests were not convincing BECAUSE everyone knows that almost all Catholic women practice forbidden birth control methods. It's not even worth arguing the opposite anymore.

That may be a Protestant argument, but not a Catholic one. No matter how many Catholics sin and have contrary opinions to the Church Teaching, it will never change doctrine...
The RCC is not a democracy, Mr. Obama !!! You need to learn that !!! The State faithful citizen but God's First !!!

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Actually, we should not forget the "ifs".

If we fail to view history with a critical eye, one where we look at the "could haves, would haves, should haves"; history shows us that we just keep repeating the same mistakes decade after decade, century after century, millennium after millennium. Likewise, things that were handled well in the past often are forgotten when new situations arise.

Collectively, mankind is a slow learner, dense, dull and nearsighted, apart from a very few shining examples.

OK, Mark, let's re-open the past. No problem...

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

I agree. I "came from" out of her to bear His reproach outside the camp.
I stay out of pews 'cause I got a realy bad splinter from one as a child.

(OK, I made that last part up)

Was it from the Catholic Church?

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Debatable. I think not.
It looks to me like the reformation drove the counter reformation, provided many of the necessary stimuluses for Vatican II, and continues to push the RCC in areas where further reform is needed.


in other words when you talked about unity at any cost you meant at any cost to us, not to you.

It looks to me like the reformation drove the counter reformation

I may agree. But were not for Reformation, you do not think that we would have today Popes like the Borgias, no? Boy, 500 years change a lot. We would not be in the Middle Ages.

in other words when you talked about unity at any cost you meant at any cost to us, not to you.

Sorry, you think that we are the unlucky Catholics, sad and desperate under the Papal yoke. That to be a Catholic is a burden that depresses anyone who enters the Church Gate.

You never think that we love the Pope, no? You do not feel what the 1.5 million youngsters from all over the world feel, the joy, the emotion of being with their Shepherd under a heavy shower in Madrid, in the Youth Gathering?

You think that we are under a despotic oppression like slaves of Stupid, Corrupt and Crazy Pope, no?

If you think so, there is nothing I can do.
Sorry, you must be in the Family to feel like family.
As for authority, remember what Christ said: "My yoke is light!" Better be in Christ's Shepherd and abdicate of my thoughts to take Christ's dogma than to pretend that I am free, thinking for myself, full of my idiotic thoughts.

Sorry, you think otherwise. But we are offering you the Papacy, the best part of Christendom. You are not giving up anything, you are gaining a lot, a huge family and God's supporting Rock !

You cannot believe but I tell you, you will be happy under the Pope. Believe me ! My opinion but your choice ...

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

It is this kind of arrogance that will prevent the Roman Catholic Church from unifying with the other major denominations of Christianity, including the Eastern Orthodox, the Lutherans, Methodists, Reformers, Baptists (and the list goes on).

You should say why is it arrogance.
Christ said that he was the tree, we were the branches.
You said:

Well I don't know about you, but the only core I'll rely on is Christ alone. I don't need the 'RCC' core to be saved.

I answered that our core is Christ. You cannot be saved alone. There are no private revelations. You cannot say that you rely in Christ alone (I could call that arrogance, as if Christ would reveal to you and to you alone! But I avoid your kind of insults!). Christ revealed first to the Chosen People, Israel, and after to The Church of Christ, which is the RCC.
Did i say something wrong?

 

[athenken]

You should say why is it arrogance.
Christ said that he was the tree, we were the branches.
You said:

I answered that our core is Christ. You cannot be saved alone. There are no private revelations. You cannot say that you rely in Christ alone (I could call that arrogance, as if Christ would reveal to you and to you alone! But I avoid your kind of insults!). Christ revealed first to the Chosen People, Israel, and after to The Church of Christ, which is the RCC.
Did i say something wrong?

You seem to have trouble responding to the right people here. The first post you quoted is indeed mine, the other is someone elses.

You seem to be clouded by many false doctrines purported by the RCC for centuries. "Papal Infallability", and the idea that noone can have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Open your eyes, my brother.

 

[Rick Otto]

Was it from the Catholic Church?

Yeah.
I knew it was bogus in 1st grade catechism. By 4th grade when they tried to teach me transubstantiation I knew it was a hopeless situation & the bestI could do was try & keep my head down until I was old enough to walk away. Turned out I was the last one in our family to quit going to mass.

 

[Albion]

That may be a Protestant argument, but not a Catholic one.

Oh, I understand. The functional myths are very important to your church. Got to keep up appearances, etc. etc. That's really always been the first priority.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

You seem to have trouble responding to the right people here. The first post you quoted is indeed mine, the other is someone elses.

You seem to be clouded by many false doctrines purported by the RCC for centuries. "Papal Infallability", and the idea that noone can have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Open your eyes, my brother.

Yes, I have trouble with that, for something people complain.
Sorry: I apologize for that.
No, Christ can speak to you personally. And He does.
But revelations are done collectively. In Christianity, to the Jewish People, the chosen People and to the Church of Christ, Which We believe it is the RCC.

You Protestant speak so much about Papal Infallibility as if Pope was infallible when talking about culinary recipes. Rarely a Pope speaks "ex cathedra". Some Popes never did. Popes make mistakes and are not always infallible. As i said, some never used that character. For instance, I dont remember any declaration "ex cathedra" of the last 6 popes. Yet, the Infallibility comes always connected with the Pope.

The tone some Protestant use here seems to be much more "infallible" than the tone of our Popes.

Sorry again for my mistakes.

Pray for you, Brother.

 

[Albion]

You Protestant speak so much about Papal Infallibility as if Pope was infallible when talking about culinary recipes.

Show us a few examples of Protestants actually doing that.


These endless strawman arguments are a waste of everyone's time.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Yeah.
I knew it was bogus in 1st grade catechism. By 4th grade when they tried to teach me transubstantiation I knew it was a hopeless situation & the bestI could do was try & keep my head down until I was old enough to walk away. Turned out I was the last one in our family to quit going to mass.

That happens.
Boy, no one understands Transubstantiation. When Jesus said: "My Flesh is True Meat and My Blood is True Drink", everybody left him, saying what stupid words. Even though Jesus had done a miracle for them multiplying the fishes and the bread. And Jesus said to the Apostles: "Do you want to go away?" The Apostles were at a loss, for they could not understand either. Peter said: "Where shall we go, Master? Only You have words of eternal life!" Beautiful creed. He did not understand, He believed.
I understand as much as you, but I bet in Jesus Christ. I believe in what he said. Sometimes I miss mass. But even missing, I believe Him. I do not care whether I understand. I prefer to believe him. Anyhow, what I understand of everything is pretty much close to zero.
Crisis in Faith? everybody has got it !!!

 

[Albion]

That happens.
Boy, no one understands Transubstantiation.

Seems as though it's usually been described correctly here by the Protestants and EOs, with only the RCs mistakenly thinking that it is the same as Real Presence.

 

[athenken]

Yes, I have trouble with that, for something people complain.
Sorry: I apologize for that.
No, Christ can speak to you personally. And He does.
But revelations are done collectively. In Christianity, to the Jewish People, the chosen People and to the Church of Christ, Which We believe it is the RCC.

You Protestant speak so much about Papal Infallibility as if Pope was infallible when talking about culinary recipes. Rarely a Pope speaks "ex cathedra". Some Popes never did. Popes make mistakes and are not always infallible. As i said, some never used that character. For instance, I dont remember any declaration "ex cathedra" of the last 6 popes. Yet, the Infallibility comes always connected with the Pope.

The tone some Protestant use here seems to be much more "infallible" than the tone of our Popes.

Sorry again for my mistakes.

Pray for you, Brother.

Wow, you are so all over the place here one could assume you are either bipolar or schizo. I never said the Pope was infallible, that was quoted from one of your previous posts. I have never, and will never, propose that any human is infallible, other than Christ.

To assume that the Pope "becomes" infallible when he is ordained is a complete fallacy. Just like when people say when we are saved we are suddenly without sin. Completely wrong.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Oh, I understand. The functional myths are very important to your church. Got to keep up appearances, etc. etc. That's really always been the first priority.

Here you go again...
That 90% of Catholics think that the doctrine XYZ is wrong does not make it wrong !!!
With Protestant, the 90% would go and create a Church in which doctrine XYZ is wrong.
But with Catholics, the 90% either keep themselves inside and accept the doctrine thought they think it is wrong or else they must leave (all or some).
Things works this way in the Catholic Church.
What can I say more ?
As for "functional myths", what "functional myths"?
No appearances keeping. Either you accept and sin and repent, or rather you leave. Some may want to keep appearances but that is not accepted by God for he knows every heart. You may pretend before men but not before God.

 

[Albion]

But with Catholics, the 90% either keep themselves inside and accept the doctrine thought they think it is wrong or else they must leave (all or some).
Things works this way in the Catholic Church.

But in fact neither of those happens. That is what I was referring to with the Obama example. Most Catholics do not adhere to the Church's official teachings and do not leave, either. That's because of the hold one particular myth has on them--that there is only one real church and however wrong it is, that's where they must keep their membership or risk losing God's favor.

It's worked very well but it's also a shame that any church would think it had to terrorize its own people in order to keep them loyal.

What can I say more ?

I have no doubt that you'll think of something.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

But in fact neither of those happens. That is what I was referring to with the Obama example. Most Catholics do not adhere to the Church's official teachings and do not leave, either. That's because of the hold one particular myth has on them--that there is only one real church and however wrong it is, that's where they must keep their membership or risk losing God's favor.

It's worked very well but it's also a shame that any church would think it had to terrorize its own people in order to keep them loyal.


I have no doubt that you'll think of something.

Obama example.

But of course. Many couples have trouble with the Catholic viewpoint on contraception. I am in a Catholic Forum and I see real dramas. Very real dramas.
Some people do not follow because they are not capable of doing that. And they suffer for not being able.
Others revolt against something they do not understand.
Others revolt because they wanted to follow but there are problems over problems.
So, it is not black and white: do not agree, leave.
I tell you where it is and though I do not own the thing and have not authority over it, you are most welcome to participate:
Catholic Answers Forums
Obama was the recent greatest deception I had.
The man is intelligent, handsome and speaks well but that is not enough: as for values, I do not know where does he stand for...

I have no doubt that you'll think of something.

You dont know who I am but you already know me well.
Thanks.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

OK, Mark, let's re-open the past. No problem...

I thought that's what this thread is about; discussing the good, the bad and the ugly of the Reformation; and likewise, the good, the bad and the ugly of the pre reformation Church; looking at the cause and the effect, and trying to come to a deeper understanding.

But in fact neither of those happens. That is what I was referring to with the Obama example. Most Catholics do not adhere to the Church's official teachings and do not leave, either. That's because of the hold one particular myth has on them--that there is only one real church and however wrong it is, that's where they must keep their membership or risk losing God's favor.

It's worked very well but it's also a shame that any church would think it had to terrorize its own people in order to keep them loyal.


I have no doubt that you'll think of something.

Albion, with all due respect, I believe that all denominations and Churches have dissenters within. Within Anglicanism and Liberal Lutheranism, there are those who are at odds with various recent innovations such as homosexuality, female ordination, fellowship with reformed protestant denominations etc. Likewise within our Confessional Lutheran Synods and more conservative Anglican Churches and Provinces, there are those who feel that we are not conservative enough.

We should not hold the membership of the RCC to a higher standard than to which we hold those within our own communions.

There are few Christians, within and outside of Rome that will not agree that the pre reformation Church needed reform. In my opinion, the greatest shame of the Reformation was not Luther and his colleagues, It was the Princes who desired political independence, and championed the Reformation to achieve this end. Christ said that we are to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's. The pre Reformation Church should have been only that, a Church, not "the" political power to be reckoned with; likewise, the reformation should not have been used to wrest political power away from Rome. IMO, it is this confusing and confounding of roles on both sides which became the biggest barrier, and ultimately prevented meaningful and open discussion, resolution, and reconciliation. Had politics been kept out of the equation, we may well be seeing a much different Christian Church than we have today.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

In a Catholic Forum I participate, somebody wrote something that constitutes my feelings, though I could not say it this way, out of ignorance of the details (adapted, with cuts):

In reading all the posts from protestants on various boards and listening to many radio shows attended protestant services my assessment of protestantism is that it is a mixture of theologies of which each individual protestant will have their scriptures lined up to defend as the Word of God, yet which clearly cannot all be true. I.e. 7 year premil, 3.5year pre-mil, postmil, no-mil, amil, etc. etc. Just as one example of the multitude of theologies on one topic that each one will defend to the grave.
(.......)
I listen to a local protestant radio station and it has lutherans on declaring baptismal regeneration and infant baptism and then baptists on who deny both of these things. OSAS and the possibility of falling away, dispensationalists, preterists, partial preterists, you name it and various combinations of the above.

Many of the above mentioned doctrines I do not know, but that is what I feel, the free personal interpretation leads to every interpretation.