Do all of the Christians who account themselves "Traditional" in their theology accept that the real presence is a physical reality?

[David Kent]

July 4th1533, Andrew Hewet was burnt to death. Ayoung man fairly local to here, he was interrogated on suspicion of being a gospeller, he was asked by a tribunal of bishops if he believed in a real presence. He replied that he believed as did John Frith. "Why frith is a heretic and sentenced to be burnt". Andrew's answer was "With that I am content. "

If that doctrine has to be enforced by such measures, it is from hell and not heaven.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

A quote from Martin Chemnitz:

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The “body of Christ” refers to the entirety of the mystery of the totality of Christ: his whole earthly ministry, but also his ascension to the Father’s right hand.

Language matters. The Eucharist is more than ‘the body of Jesus.’

Taking liberties with the wording of magisterial teachings or the wording of the liturgy is an extremely dangerous and self-serving exercise in terms of the church’s belief.

www.americamagazine.org

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

The “body of Christ” refers to the entirety of the mystery of the totality of Christ: his whole earthly ministry, but also his ascension to the Father’s right hand.

Language matters. The Eucharist is more than ‘the body of Jesus.’

Taking liberties with the wording of magisterial teachings or the wording of the liturgy is an extremely dangerous and self-serving exercise in terms of the church’s belief.

www.americamagazine.org

Sure, but that is a figurative context which we are not discussing in this thread. We are talking relative to the Eucharist. So is the article which you posted.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The “body of Christ” refers to the entirety of the mystery of the totality of Christ: his whole earthly ministry, but also his ascension to the Father’s right hand.

Language matters. The Eucharist is more than ‘the body of Jesus.’

Taking liberties with the wording of magisterial teachings or the wording of the liturgy is an extremely dangerous and self-serving exercise in terms of the church’s belief.

www.americamagazine.org

America Magazine has recently changed the title of this article. Seems that at least the title of the article was problematic. Currently it is

'Language matters. The Eucharist is more than ‘the body of Jesus.’​

See more here, wading through to the 'editorial heresy' part: Fruitful life, editorial heresy, and they who only cricket know

 

[FireDragon76]

July 4th1533, Andrew Hewet was burnt to death. Ayoung man fairly local to here, he was interrogated on suspicion of being a gospeller, he was asked by a tribunal of bishops if he believed in a real presence. He replied that he believed as did John Frith. "Why frith is a heretic and sentenced to be burnt". Andrew's answer was "With that I am content. "

If that doctrine has to be enforced by such measures, it is from hell and not heaven.

That doesn't logically follow. People can overzealously defend the truth with evil means. That doen't make it untrue.

 

[David Kent]

That doesn't logically follow. People can overzealously defend the truth with evil means. That doen't make it untrue.

By their fruits ye shall know them. Anyone who murders is nt a child of God.

 

[dzheremi]

By their fruits ye shall know them. Anyone who murders is nt a child of God.

And yet the Assyrians were simultaneously the rod of God's anger (Isaiah 10:5) and the first people to convert to Christianity. Go figure.

 

[The Liturgist]

By their fruits ye shall know them. Anyone who murders is nt a child of God.

That’s true, but the argument you made remains fallacious, for various reasons, such as the execution of thousands of Roman Catholic priests in England, Scotland and Wales for preaching the doctrine of the Real Presence after those countries converted to Protestantism, especially during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. It was illegal to believe, and a capital crime to preach, the doctrine of transubstantiation, in the UK, after the reforms imposed by Thomas Cranmer during the reigns of King Edward VI and Elizabeth I.

 

[David Kent]

That’s true, but the argument you made remains fallacious, for various reasons, such as the execution of thousands of Roman Catholic priests in England, Scotland and Wales for preaching the doctrine of the Real Presence after those countries converted to Protestantism, especially during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. It was illegal to believe, and a capital crime to preach, the doctrine of transubstantiation, in the UK, after the reforms imposed by Thomas Cranmer during the reigns of King Edward VI and Elizabeth I.

The r Roman priests were not martyrs, they were charged with treason as the Pope had ordered them to kill the Queen.

It is often said that Augustine brought Christianity to England. That is a lie. Christianity was brought by the Romans and was mostly confined to the Britons who recognised the Augustinian Roman Catholicism as heresy. Augustine had great success amongst the Saxons as their pagan religion was similar to that of the papists. When Augustine reached Wales he demanded that the king converted to Catholicism, which he refused, so Augustine ordered his troops to fight the Welsh and killed 1,000 of them.

Rome like Islam often used the sword to covert, rather than the sword of the spirit, the Word of God.

Rome nearly succeeded in overthrowing the English monarchy and parliament by the gunpowder plot. But God intervened. Likewise God intervened by destroying in the Spanish armada.

And WW2. Where the Pope supported Hitler and Mussolini in the war against Enland and Russia. The Pope wanted Japan to invade Russia from the East. But instead the Japs attacked Pearl Harbour, which was not what he wanted. He had successfully kept the USA out of the war till then. If he had succeeded, then USA would have been next.

The South American countries were mostly neutral but favoured Hitler, probably in fears of the US if they had joined the war.

The day after the death of Hitler, they all declared war on Germany, as did Spain.

Which two countries mourned the death of Hitler? One officially, the other semi officially?

 

[FireDragon76]

The r Roman priests were not martyrs, they were charged with treason as the Pope had ordered them to kill the Queen.

It is often said that Augustine brought Christianity to England. That is a lie. Christianity was brought by the Romans and was mostly confined to the Britons who recognised the RC heresy. Augustine had great success amongst the Saxons as their pagan religion was similar to that of the papists. When Augustine reached Wales he demanded that the king converted to Catholicism, which he refused, so Augustine ordered hism troops to fight the Welsh and killed 1,000 of them.

Rome like Islam often used the sword to covert, rather than the sword of the spirit, the Word of God.

Rome nearly succeeded in overthrowing the English monarchy and parliament by the gunpowder plot. But God intervened. Likewise God intervened by destroying in the Spanish armada.

And WW2. Where the Pope supported Hitler and Mussolini in the war against Enland and Russia. The Pope wanted Japan to invade Russia from the East. But instead the Japs attacked Pearl Harbour, which was not what he wanted. He had successfully kept the USA out of the war till then. If he had succeeded, then USA would have been next.

The South American countries were mostly neutral but favoured Hitler, probably in fears of the US if they had joined the war.

The day after the death of Hitler, they all declared war on Germany, as did Spain.

Which two countries mourned the death of Hitler? One officially, the other semi officially?

That's propaganda and oversimplification.

By their fruits ye shall know them. Anyone who murders is nt a child of God.

At any rate, Protestants have plenty of blood on their hands in England, and especially Ireland. To say nothing of continental Europe.

 

[David Kent]

Yes Ireland. It was a Pope that ordered King Henry II to is
Install the RC Religion on Ireland as a penance for the death of Thomas Becket, he gave Ireland to England, just as later a Pope gave all the Americas to Spain. The Irish were evangelicals Augustine and they sent missionaries to England.

 

[FireDragon76]

Yes Ireland. I was a Pope that ordered King Henry II to is
Install the RC Religion on Ireland as a penance for the death of Thomas Becket, he gave Ireland to England, just as later a Pope gave all the Americas to Spain. The Irish were evangelicals before that aand sent missionaries to England.

You can debate whether or not it's proper to define medieval Christians as "Roman Catholic", but its anachronistic to suggest they were "Evangelicals".

 

[David Kent]

Not sure what you mean. Please explain

 

[FireDragon76]

Not sure what you mean. Please explain

There was nothing definable as Protestantism prior to the 16th century. The notion that Irish were proto-Protestants is part of the "Celtic Christianity" mythos that is faddish in certain religious circles in Britain, and while it contains kernels of historical fact, these are widely distorted and misused as religious nationalist propaganda.

 

[David Kent]

There was nothing definable as Protestantism prior to the 16th century. The notion that Irish were proto-Protestants is part of the "Celtic Christianity" mythos that is faddish in certain religious circles in Britain, and while it contains kernels of historical fact, these are widely distorted and misused as religious nationalist propaganda.

That is just not true,.The Luddites were well before Easter, and continued till the reformation. John Brown of my town, Ashford, was burnt to death by the Catholics, in the same year as Matin Luther pinned his 95 Theses to his Church door. John Huss who was burnt to death 100 years before the reformation and wrote many letters to the Wycklifites he considered the Pope to be Antichrist. The Husssites or Bohemian Brethren, came from missionaries from the poor men of Lyon, dating from 13th century.

Before them were the Waldensians who claim their departure from Rome to the time of Sylvester, bishop of Rome at the time of Constantine, who instituted Catholicism.
Constantine made christianity the state religion, so many pagans came into the church and brought their idols with the, but renamed them saints.

 

[FireDragon76]

That is just not true,.The Luddites were well before Easter, and continued till the reformation. John Brown of my town, Ashford, was burnt to death by the Catholics, in the same year as Matin Luther pinned his 95 Theses to his Church door. John Huss who was burnt to death 100 years before the reformation and wrote many letters to the Wycklifites he considered the Pope to be Antichrist. The Husssites or Bohemian Brethren, came from missionaries from the poor men of Lyon, dating from 13th century.

Before them were the Waldensians who claim their departure from Rome to the time of Sylvester, bishop of Rome at the time of Constantine, who instituted Catholicism.
Constantine made christianity the state religion, so many pagans came into the church and brought their idols with the, but renamed them saints.

Jan Hus wasn't a Protestant. His followers started a movement that later became known as Moravians, but seeing Hus as a Protestant is anachronistic.

The man that gave the most shape to Moravianism as a movement was actually a German Lutheran Pietist, Court Nicolaus Zizendorf, actually started a fraternal society that included Catholics, and he himself believed in Christian unity, not sectarianism.

Hussites did not come from the Waldensians. There is no direct connection. Jan Hus was influenced by the teachings of Wycliffe (who also wasn't a Protestant and held typical medieval views on salvation). The Waldensians were mostly confined to northern and central Italy. They later joined the Reformation but Peter Waldo himself did not consider himself different in terms of confession than other medieval Christians. Medieval Christianity was full of similar lay preachers, but most of them didn't end up starting religious movements.

I have studied Peter Waldo and the Waldensians because some of my ancestors were Hugenots (and some were Irish Catholics), and I have distant DNA relatives in Italy and North Africa. It turns out some Waldensians moved north during the Reformation, into France. But it's quite anachronistic to see Peter Waldo himself as a Protestant.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

John Brown of my town, Ashford, was burnt to death by the Catholics, in the same year as Matin Luther pinned his 95 Theses to his Church door.

One may as well say he was burnt to death by Englishmen since at that time all Englishmen were Catholics, at least outwardly.

John Huss who was burnt to death 100 years before the reformation and wrote many letters to the Wycklifites he considered the Pope to be Antichrist.

John Huss was a leading figure in the religious confusion in Bohemia, and the followers of John Wycliffe were Englishmen and women who were counted as heretics by almost all of England at that time.

missionaries from the poor men of Lyon, dating from 13th century.

Wikipedia says this of the Waldensians

The Waldensians, also known as Waldenses (/wɔːlˈdɛnsiːz, wɒl-/), Vallenses, Valdesi, or Vaudois, are adherents of a church tradition that began as an ascetic movement within Western Christianity before the Reformation. Originally known as the "Poor Men of Lyon" in the late twelfth century,[1][2][3] the movement spread to the Cottian Alps in what are today France and Italy. The founding of the Waldensians is attributed to Peter Waldo, a wealthy merchant who gave away his property around 1173,[1][2] preaching apostolic poverty as the way to perfection.​

​

Waldensian teachings came into conflict with the Catholic Church and by 1215 the Waldensians were declared heretical, not because they preached apostolic poverty, which the Franciscans also preached, but because they were not willing to recognize the prerogatives of local bishops over the content of their preaching, nor to recognize standards about who was fit to preach. Pope Innocent III offered the Waldensians the chance to return to the Church, and many did, taking the name "Poor Catholics".[4] Many did not, and were subjected to intense persecution and were confronted with organised and general discrimination in the following centuries. In the 16th century, the Waldensians were absorbed into the Protestant movement, under the influence of early Swiss reformer Heinrich Bullinger.​

​

In some aspects the Waldensians of the Middle Ages could be seen as proto-Protestants, but they mostly did not raise the doctrinal objections characteristic of 16th century Protestant leaders.[5] They came to align themselves with Protestantism: with the Resolutions of Chanforan on 12 September 1532, they formally became a part of the Calvinist tradition. They are members of the Community of Protestant Churches in Europe and its affiliates worldwide. They were nearly annihilated in the 17th century.​

They were not "protestants" but they held some beliefs which at a later time "protestants" took up as their own.

 

[The Liturgist]

Also its worth noting that St. Jan Hus (who together with St. Jerome of Prague were glorified by the Czech Orthodox Church), were basically seeking a restoration of aspects of Orthodox worship such as communion in both kinds and vernacular liturgy. They are not to be confused with the more extreme Taborite faction.

 

[FireDragon76]

Also its worth noting that St. Jan Hus (who together with St. Jerome of Prague were glorified by the Czech Orthodox Church), were basically seeking a restoration of aspects of Orthodox worship such as communion in both kinds and vernacular liturgy. They are not to be confused with the more extreme Taborite faction.

Yes, that was his main liturgical reform he sought. What really alarmed him was the war between Avignon and Rome, though, and the large amounts of tithes and indulgences collected to support it.