Why we cannot accept the Reformation!

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,651
18,543
Orlando, Florida
✟1,261,063.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Politics
US-Democrat
Had Paul gone off and made his own Church because Peter didn't want to eat with gentiles, would we support him in that decision? Why divide the Church because of human failings? Especially when those failings have been rectified?

We can't come home just yet to "Mother Church". Even if doctrinal disagreement of the Reformation were not a major issue (which it isn't in my particular denomination), we have ecclessiological, pastoral and ethical commitments that we can't waive aside in the name of unity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeaconDean
Upvote 0

Phil 1:21

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2017
5,869
4,399
United States
✟144,842.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why divide the Church because of human failings? Especially when those failings have been rectified?
As we see from this thread and others like it, those failing have not been rectified. In defense of the RCC, they have started coming around a bit.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Had Paul gone off and made his own Church because Peter didn't want to eat with gentiles, would we support him in that decision? Why divide the Church because of human failings? Especially when those failings have been rectified?
For one thing, they haven't been rectified. The RCC has gradually come around to accepting many of the practices that the Reformation championed and the RCC condemned, but much still separates the two sides.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Had Paul gone off and made his own Church because Peter didn't want to eat with gentiles, would we support him in that decision? Why divide the Church because of human failings? Especially when those failings have been rectified?

As we all know, the Reformation was about a lot more than indulgences and wrongfully made appointments.

I'm not going to debate this.

I have produced facts that at the time of the Reformation, the church was corrupt and greedy.

Had Peter done what God told him to do, there may have been no need for Paul.

But being disobedient, the Gospel to the uncircumcised was taken away and given to somebody else.

And I'm not saying this was singularly attributed to the Catholic church. It seems to me that a there were two individuals who earned the nickname for their group as "Pass the Loot".

What I am saying is that there is a long history in the Catholic church which helped to bring about the Reformation.

And personally, I thank God for it.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

sdowney717

Newbie
Apr 20, 2013
8,712
2,022
✟102,598.00
Faith
Christian
No just because Paul or the Bible teach faith, as in Heb 11:6 or John 3:16 does not mean faith alone, they are establishing sound doctrine must begin with faith! You still have Det. Hear oh Israel the Lord your God is one Lord, and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and your neighbor as yourself which Christ affirmed!

Jesus says it clearly about those who believe in Him.
John 5
24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.
 
Upvote 0

Francis Drake

Returning adventurer.
Apr 14, 2013
4,000
2,508
✟184,952.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Independence-Party
As we see from this thread and others like it, those failing have not been rectified. In defense of the RCC, they have started coming around a bit.
The RCC is a pantheistic cult and will never abandon idol worship, particularly worship of the Queen of Heaven.
 
Upvote 0

CaspianSails

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2019
579
302
65
Washington DC metro area
✟27,746.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Jesus Christ and the Bible say
Matt 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. Jesus Christ is the one who builds the church, not luther, calvin or Henry the eighth!

Peter is not the foundation or rock of the church. The truth which Christ said His Father revealed to Peter is the foundation. Even a cursory reading of the New Testament beginning in the book of Acts demonstrates that Peter was not considered the foundation of the Church. He was one of the Apostles but held no special seat of power. There is only one head of the Church and that is Christ and Christ alone. He is the head and we are the body. We only function with Him as the head. Peter would have been part of the body. All of Christianity is centered totally, wholly and without exception and at the expense of every other believer, including Peter, on Christ and Christ alone.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Halbhh
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,454
5,306
✟828,231.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Jesus Christ and the Bible say
Matt 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. Jesus Christ is the one who builds the church, not luther, calvin or Henry the eighth!

Peter is not the foundation or rock of the church. The truth which Christ said His Father revealed to Peter is the foundation. Even a cursory reading of the New Testament beginning in the book of Acts demonstrates that Peter was not considered the foundation of the Church. He was one of the Apostles but held no special seat of power. There is only one head of the Church and that is Christ and Christ alone. He is the head and we are the body. We only function with Him as the head. Peter would have been part of the body. All of Christianity is centered totally, wholly and without exception and at the expense of every other believer, including Peter, on Christ and Christ alone.

While I agree, St. Peter was not the foundation of the the Church, what he confessed was "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God".

Historically, Peter held a high place in the Church of the first century; almost certainly a Bishop; maybe even the Supreme Bishop in his time (Pope in it's original meaning; maybe). Regarding the Reformation; proto-reformers such as Waldo and Hus and St. Francis never sought to depart from the Church catholic. St. Francis (looking from the outside in) may have done more damage to the Catholic Church than either Waldo and Hus could ever have done. The Church Catholic has shown a diverse response to reform: The Orthodox generally view the Catholic Church in the same way as Catholics view Lutherans as heterodox and heretical; being mindful that it was the CC that left the Orthodox; being equally mindful that the CC left the Lutherans who only sought fellowship and reconciliation (see the Augsburg Confession, the Refutation. and the explanation of the Augsburg Confession (aka the Apology)).

It's worth noting that many of the so called "heretical innovations" of the Lutherans have since found their way into the theology and practice of the CC, and such may indeed be why they don't recognize the reformation, as they continually reform themselves. More recently, liberal reforms far more radical than what would be accepted in the Confessional Lutheran Churches have found their way into the CC; but those are topics for other threads.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Halbhh
Upvote 0

CaspianSails

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2019
579
302
65
Washington DC metro area
✟27,746.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
While I agree, St. Peter was not the foundation of the the Church, what he confessed was "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God".

Historically, Peter held a high place in the Church of the first century; almost certainly a Bishop; maybe even the Supreme Bishop in his time (Pope in it's original meaning; maybe). Regarding the Reformation; proto-reformers such as Waldo and Hus and St. Francis never sought to depart from the Church catholic. St. Francis (looking from the outside in) may have done more damage to the Catholic Church than either Waldo and Hus could ever have done. The Church Catholic has shown a diverse response to reform: The Orthodox generally view the Catholic Church in the same way as Catholics view Lutherans as heterodox and heretical; being mindful that it was the CC that left the Orthodox; being equally mindful that the CC left the Lutherans who only sought fellowship and reconciliation (see the Augsburg Confession, the Refutation. and the explanation of the Augsburg Confession (aka the Apology)).

It's worth noting that many of the so called "heretical innovations" of the Lutherans have since found their way into the theology and practice of the CC, and such may indeed be why they don't recognize the reformation, as they continually reform themselves. More recently, liberal reforms far more radical than what would be accepted in the Confessional Lutheran Churches have found their way into the CC; but those are topics for other threads.

Peter did hold some sway but it is not clear that his position was much higher than the other Apostles. He was more apparently more outspoken in that He wrote and it is quite clear he was one who was considered and taken esteem from. It is not clear to me the Apostles held what we today would call an office of Bishop. For the most part those are post Apostolic offices. But I would agree there was some equivalency. I did not mean to downplay Peter or any of the Apostles. Those men were with Jesus physically and knew much more than we do today given only a small portion of His deeds are recorded.
 
Upvote 0

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
79
Southern Ga.
✟157,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Faith alone is not biblical!
You CANNOT believe in salvation by faith alone and believe the teaching of Jesus Christ!

Jesus Christ taught: Mark 16:16

Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved,

It can't be both!

You CANNOT believe in salvation by faith alone and believe the teaching of Paul!

Paul taught: 1 Cor 13 three things are eternal: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

If it was faith alone, the greatest would be faith! But the greatest is love!

3 things not faith alone!

You CANNOT believe in salvation by faith alone and believe the Bible!

The Bible teaches:

Rom 8:24 For we are saved by hope: not faith alone!

1 Timothy 2:15
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. Not faith alone!

1 Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us! Not faith alone!

Romans 13:11
For now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

This scripture makes no logical sense if you believe faith alone!


Isn't that what Leo said to Luther?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums