“…in this Holy See there have been many abominations…” – Pope Adrian VI, 1522.

[raumzeitmc2]

(I thought this might be better re-posted here)

In a letter (excerpted below) to Francis Chieregato, dated November 25, 1522, Pope Adrian VI speaks with noticeable concern regarding the corruption (moral not doctrinal) in the Church of his day. As this letter clearly shows, the Church was not only aware of the numerous abuses etc, but also, very much desirous of bringing about true reformation, all the while preserving unity.

Adrian, on the matter of corruption and reformation, writes:

We know that in this Holy See there have been many abominations these many years abuses in spiritual things, excessive decrees, and everything perverted; nor is there any wonder if the disease has descended from the head to the members; from the supreme pontiffs to other prelates of lower rank. “We all (i.e., we prelates and ecclesisatics) have gone aside everyone to his own ways, and there was none that did good, no, not one.”

Therefore it is necessary that we all give glory to God and humble our souls before Him, and each of us see whence he has fallen, and rather judge himself than await the judgment of God in the rod of His anger. In this matter, so far as we are concerned, you will promise that we shall spare no pains that this curia, from which, perchance, this whole evil has emanated, shall be reformed first of all, so that the health and reformation of all may also emanate from it. We feel ourselves the more bound to bring this about because we see that *the whole world eagerly desires this kind of a reformation. *

We were never ambitious for this pontificate (as we believe we have told you elsewhere), and so far as we were ourselves concerned we should have preferred to lead a private life and to serve God in retirement; indeed, we should have utterly refused the pontificate if the fear of God and the purity of our election and the danger that schisms might have arisen out of our refusal had not compelled us to accept it. Therefore we took upon us the yoke of the supreme dignity, not from lust of power, nor for the purpose of enriching our relatives, but with the intention of obeying God’s will, of reforming the deformed Church, His bride, of succoring the oppressed, of promoting and honoring learned and virtuous men who have for a long time been neglected, and of doing everything else that a good Pope and legitimate successor of St. Peter ought to do.

No one should be surprised, however, if he sees that we do not immediately correct all the wrongs and abuses. The disease is too deep-seated; it is not simple but has many complications; its cure must proceed slowly and the most serious and dangerous symptoms must be combated first, lest in our desire to reform everything at once we turn everything upside down. Sudden changes are dangerous in a state, says Aristotle, and he who blows his nose too hard draws blood.

Luther’s Correspondence and Other Contemporary Letters, Martin Luther, Preserved Smith, Charles Michael Jacobs, vol. II, pp. 146-147.

books.google.com/books?id=oEy_3aDT61sC&pg=PA146&dq=%22+in+this+Holy+See+there+have+been+many+abominations%22&lr=

archive.org/details/lutherscorrespon02luthuoft

And now a question to our Protestant friends: Sin, unfortunately, will always be a part of the Church, but what hope can there ever be for true reformation if one breaks from the bond of peace and unity of the one Church? And I would ask you to also consider these very important words of St. Irenaeus:

He shall also judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, [positively] destroy it—men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. (Matthew 23:24) For no reformation of so great importance can be effected by them, as will compensate for the mischief arising from their schism.

Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter 33:7

newadvent.org/fathers/0103433.htm

---

“If thou know not thyself, O fairest among women, go forth, and follow after the steps of the flocks, and feed thy kids beside the tents of the shepherds.” - Song of Songs 1:7
newadvent.org/bible/son001.htm

“Heretical leaders, though, wish to make their own the sheep that are really Christ’s; all the same they are forced, willy-nilly, to set the stamp of Christ on them; to make them their own private flock, and yet to register them in the Lord’s name. But what does divine scripture say to such people in the Song of Songs? You see, the bridegroom is addressing the bride, Christ the Church, and saying, Unless you recognize yourself, O beautiful among women. What’s beautiful among women? Catholic among heresies.”

• St. Augustine, Sermon 229O: 3:2, p. 325.

Works of Saint Augustine, Sermons 184-229, John E. Rotelle, Edmund Hill, eds. & trs., New City Press, 1993, ISBN 1565480503
amazon.com/Sermons-184-229-Works-Saint-Augustine/dp/1565480503

 

[wisdomseeker]

and my question is: are protestants justified for breaking away from the Church? they seem to think so because the holy father ask for forgiveness. i heard people telling me how hte CC admitted to be wrong. once again protestants got all wrong.

 

[Peter_J]

Hi raumzeitmc2,

There was a post a few days ago that I wasn’t sure how to best respond to. I think it converges with the topic of this thread:

Sure…but we have to deal with the facts of sin upon human history. Should any split not have happened? No…Christ desires unity within the Church. But Christ also calls us to not join light with darkness and truth with error. Though Luther did not seek separation, after his excommunication, what choice did he have?

 

[raumzeitmc2]

and my question is: are protestants justified for breaking away from the Church? they seem to think so because the holy father ask for forgiveness. i heard people telling me how hte CC admitted to be wrong. once again protestants got all wrong.

The very short answer would be:No one is ever justified for breaking the bonds of unity or separating themselves from the See of Peter ( see below).

TriuneUnity said:

“No…Christ desires unity within the Church. But Christ also calls us to not join light with darkness and truth with error. Though Luther did not seek separation, after his excommunication, what choice did he have?”

St. Augustine had to respond to similar charges from Petilianus, the Donatist Bishop of Cirta. In his Answer to Petilian the Donatist, Book II, Augustine first gives Petilianus’ words and then his response (as though speaking face to face).

Chapter 39:

1. Petilianus said:

But there is no fellowship of darkness with light, nor any fellowship of bitterness with the sweet of honey; there is no fellowship of life with death, of innocence with guilt, of water withblood; the lees have no fellowship with oil though they are related to it as being its dregs, but everything that is reprobate will flow away. It is the very sink of iniquity; according to the saying of John, ‘They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us.’ 1 John 2:19 There is no gold among their pollution: all that is precious has been purged away. For it is written, ‘As gold is tried in the furnace, so also are thejust tried by the harassing of tribulation.’ Cruelty is not a part of gentleness, nor religion a part of sacrilege; nor can the party of Macarius in any way be part of us, because he pollutes the likeness of our rite. For the enemy’s line, which fills up an enemy’s name, is no part of the force to which it is opposed; but if it is truly to be called a part, it will find a suitable motto in the judgment of Solomon, ‘Let their part be cut off from the earth.’" Proverbs 2:22

1. Augustine answered:

What is it but sheer madness to utter these taunts without proving anything? You look at the tares throughout the world, and pay no heed to the wheat, although *both have been bidden to grow together *throughout the whole of it. You look at the seed sown by the wicked one, which shall be separated in the time of harvest, Matthew 13:24-30 and you pay no heed to the seed of Abraham, in which all nations of the earth shall be blessed. Genesis 22:18 Just as though you were already a purged mass, and virgin honey, and refined oil, and pure gold, or rather the very similitude of a whited wall. For, to say nothing of your other faults, do the drunken form a portion of the sober, or are the covetous reckoned among the portion of the wise? If men of gentle temper appropriate the term of light, where shall the madness of the Circumcelliones be esteemed to be, excepting in the darkness?

Why then is baptism, given by men like these, held valid among you, and the same baptism of Christ not held valid, by whatsoever men it may be administered throughout the world? You see, in fact, that you are separated from the communion of the whole world in so far as this, that you are not indeed all drunk, nor all of you covetous, nor all men of violence, but that you are all heretics, and, in virtue of this, are all impious and all sacrilegious.

For Augustine, all schism was nothing short of sacrilege!

In chapter 73, we find Petilianus leveling the very same charges against Augustine and the Church as the Luther and Calvin et al made against the Apostolic Seat!

1. Petilianus said:

Since then you are not blessed by falsifying the commands of God, the Lord Christ condemns you by His divine decrees: ‘Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for you neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you compass sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he is made, you make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites…

Again, Augustine responds to Petilianus’ nonsense.

1. Augustine answered:

Tell me whether you have said anything which may not equally be said against you in turn by any slanderous and evil-speaking tongue. But from what has been said by me before, any one who wishes may find out that these things may be said against you, not by way of empty abuse, but with the support of truthful testimony. As, however, the opportunity is presented to us we must not pass this by.

There is no doubt that to the ancient people of God circumcision stood in the place of baptism. I ask, therefore, putting the case that the Pharisees against whom those words you quote are spoken, had made some proselyte, who, if he were to imitate them, would, as it is said, become twofold more the child of hell than themselves, supposing that he were to be converted, and desire to imitate Simeon, or Zacharias, or Nathanael, would it be necessary that he should be circumcised again by them? And if it is absurd to put this case why, although in empty fashion and with empty sounds you compare us to men like this, do you nevertheless baptize after us?

But if you are really men like this, how much better and how much more in accordance with truth do we act in not baptizing after you, as neither was it right that those whom I have mentioned should be circumcised after the worst of Pharisees! Furthermore, when such men sit in the seat of Moses, for which the Lord preserved its due honor, why do you *blaspheme the apostolic chair *on account of men whom, justly or unjustly, you compare with these?

newadvent.org/fathers/14092.htm

---

“It may not be improper for me to compare the privilege of the Roman Church to weapons, since she alone was established as the head of the whole Christian Church as a result of the Chair of Blessed Peter, and she presides over all the churches of the world, like a general at the forefront of his army.”

St. Peter Damian, letter 65:2, pp. 24-25. (December 1059)

Peter Damian: Letters 61-90 (Fathers of the Church, Medieval Continuation), ISBN 0813207509

amazon.com/Peter-Damian-Letters-Medieval-Continuation/dp/0813207509

“But why do you not cease to call Mary the mother of God…”

• Julian the Apostate, Against the Galileans

tertullian.org/fathers/julian_apostate_galileans_1_text.htm

books.google.com/books?q=%22not%20cease%20to%20call%20mary%20the%20mother%20of%20god%22&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&filter=0&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wp