Earliest Reformer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SandraHarrison
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SandraHarrison

Guest
Hi,
in the christian life science book I am teaching from (Apologia General Science), it spends a paragraph on a Catholic Bishop from the 1300’s by the name of Thomas Bradwardine. The Author claims he was really the first “reformer”, and questioned much of church teaching. (He also happened to be a fantastic scientist and mathemetician which is why he is listed) I doubted his reformer status, as I had never heard this claim.

I went to the Catholic Encyclopedia to research this claim; I found this:

**“Leaving the monasteries and turning our attention to the secular clergy, we encounter men who, in spite of many defects, are not without merit in dogmatic theology. The first to deserve mention Is the Englishman Thomas Bradwardine (d. 1340), the foremost mathematician of his day and Archbishop of Canterbury. ****His work “De causa Dei contra Pelagianos” [Which means Of the cause of God against the Pelegians] **** evinces a mathematical mind and an unwonted depth of thought. **Unfortunately it is marred by an unbending, somber rigorism, and this to such an extent that the Calvinistic Anglicans of a later century published it in defense of their own teachings."
and in another place in the encyclopedia:

**"It was essentially on this basis that the bishops of fourteen ecclesiastical provinces finally came to an agreement and made peace in the Synod of Tousy held in 860 . The teaching of the Middle Ages is generally characterized on the one hand by the repudiation of positive reprobation for hell and of predestination for sin, on the other by the assertion of Divine predestination of the elect for heaven and the co-operation of free will; this **teaching was only for a short time obscured by Thomas Bradwardine and the so-called precursors of the Reformation (Wycliffe, Hus, Jerome of Prague, John Wesel).”

I’d like to correct the Author ( he also gets it wrong about Galileo) and particularly have some evidence to give the students to show that the author is sweeping someone up on the side of the Protestant Reformation who does not belong there. But these two paragraphs are rather nebulus. Does anyone know anything more?

Thanks,
Sandra
 
St. Francis of Assisi was certainly a reformer of the church, well before Bradwardine, St. Catherine of Siena as well.
 
I think that there are two ways to look at the word reformer. There are those that change the Church form within without ever questioning the truth of the Faith. Many of the Saints from the 10th century to the 15th century were this type. Then there are those who question the faith itself and break from the Church, such as Luther. They are in the wrong. Now then, I do not know anything about this man, but I would say that he was neither one. It looks to me as if he was a man who took certain postions, both on science and doctrine, that when veiwed from modern lenses, seem to place him in the camp of the Reformation. I doubt that this is accurate. I see it more like modern protestants pulling text from Agustain or Aquinas to prove a point.
 
Good thread!

I thought Jesus was the** First ** Reformer… 👍
 
I think that maybe St. Paul was the first reformer of the church, since he spent a lot of time correcting heresies. But then so did other apostles and evangelists and martyrs, as well as Fathers of the Church.

JimG
 
Hey thanks, all good responses.

But the inferred claim by the author and, directly by some websites, is that the guy was the earliest Protestant reformer, bringing the “church” back to faith (Faith Alone- seems to be the implication from some websites) and supreme authority of scripture. But they don’t use quotes on the pages I have found. He is just listed in their timelines.

But what I am looking for is some detailed knowledge about Bradwardine, or some quote that the Protestants are using from Bradwardine’s writings to prop up their claim that he was a proto-protestant revolutionary who somehow inspired and fueled Wycliffe and others.

Also, there was a conflict between this guy and the reigning pontiff over something, but I can’t find out over what.

Any help would be welcome; I am not that good at internet searches. 🙂

Sandra
 
40.png
DominvsVobiscvm:
The Earliest “Reformer”?

Satan . . . 😉
Click to expand...
Wow! I never heard that one!
 
I have to just laugh at most Protestant claims. Some just go completely all the way and say that the Baptist Church is the oldest denomination because some claim they can trace it all the way back to Jesus. They say that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and that made Jesus a Baptist.

There are many nutty claims in order to try to undermine the Catholic Church in one form or another. I would say that this fellow mentioned as the main topic of this thread is just another example.
 
40.png
SandraHarrison:
Hi,
in the christian life science book I am teaching from (Apologia General Science), it spends a paragraph on a Catholic Bishop from the 1300’s by the name of Thomas Bradwardine. The Author claims he was really the first “reformer”, and questioned much of church teaching. (He also happened to be a fantastic scientist and mathemetician which is why he is listed) I doubted his reformer status, as I had never heard this claim.

I went to the Catholic Encyclopedia to research this claim; I found this:

**“Leaving the monasteries and turning our attention to the secular clergy, we encounter men who, in spite of many defects, are not without merit in dogmatic theology. The first to deserve mention Is the Englishman Thomas Bradwardine (d. 1340), the foremost mathematician of his day and Archbishop of Canterbury. ****His work “De causa Dei contra Pelagianos” [Which means Of the cause of God against the Pelegians] ****evinces a mathematical mind and an unwonted depth of thought. **Unfortunately it is marred by an unbending, somber rigorism, and this to such an extent that the Calvinistic Anglicans of a later century published it in defense of their own teachings."

and in another place in the encyclopedia:

**"It was essentially on this basis that the bishops of fourteen ecclesiastical provinces finally came to an agreement and made peace in the Synod of Tousy held in 860 . The teaching of the Middle Ages is generally characterized on the one hand by the repudiation of positive reprobation for hell and of predestination for sin, on the other by the assertion of Divine predestination of the elect for heaven and the co-operation of free will; this **teaching was only for a short time obscured by Thomas Bradwardine and the so-called precursors of the Reformation (Wycliffe, Hus, Jerome of Prague, John Wesel).”

I’d like to correct the Author ( he also gets it wrong about Galileo) and particularly have some evidence to give the students to show that the author is sweeping someone up on the side of the Protestant Reformation who does not belong there. But these two paragraphs are rather nebulus. Does anyone know anything more?

Thanks,
Sandra
Click to expand...

How does the author need to be corrected 🙂 ?​

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top