Episcopalian Vs. Catholic?

[GKC]

I try to.

I’ve been meaning to try it myself.

GKC

 

[GKC]

does anyone feel that the Roman Catholic church could have been reformed from within or was it too corrupt? the one poster mentioned the plague and how many of the clergy died. certainly that impacted the church because they would have had to replace clergy quickly and many might not have been well trained leading up to the corruption in the 1500’s. however, the church of england was not founded because the roman catholic church was corrupt.
henry might have had a few grievances with Rome, but i think that if Rome would have granted henry the annulment he wanted, most likely england would have remained Catholic. At least for awhile. since Henry did side with the Pope against Luther in the beginning.

Likely you are right. For a while, anyway. But the trends for more autonomy, both for the Church in England, and for the throne, over the Church, didn’t start with Henry. You can trace decrees and acts of Paliament back 250+ years, aimed at achieving those goals. Even without Henry’s Great Matter, something would likely have caused a crisis, eventually. No idea when.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Fr Pacwa said that Luther “never felt good enough” because he killed a man in a duel, and couldn’t get over his guilty feelings.

Fr Groeschel gave a lecture about the Reformation several years ago. He brought these points:
–Calvin and Luther had sincere motives. They were wrong, but sincere.

–Before Luther, there were reformers working within the Church. One of them was St Catherine of Genoa, aka Madame Adorno in the Protestant world, and Luther was influenced by her.

–People forget the plague. Poorly trained clergy, in part, can be traced to the effects of plague which in some cases wiped out whole religious communities. It was the duty of the religious priests, monks, and nuns to take care of the sick, so it’s not surprising that they died in high numbers. The most holy people, concerned with Christian charity, were the most likely to die.

Good points about the plague but the ‘fact’ that Luther killed a man in a duel sounds like dubious history to me. That sounds about as legit as the old Catholic apocryphal tale where Luther, on his death bed, regretted what he did and embraced the Catholic Church and re-verted. By the way, Mitch Pacwa said so it’s gospel? I hear so many folks quote EWTN personalities as if they’re living apostles.

Also, Father Groeschel is a brilliant man but his opinions are just that, opinions.

When you find the incident of Luther being involved in a duel in an actual historical text documented, let me know. I’ve read volumes on Luther and never heard that one! Sounds pretty far-fetched.
It is entirely possible to have a guilt-ridden conscience and be overly-scrupulous as well as obsessed with holiness without killing somebody.

I hear folks in CAF that obsess about the tiniest sins like Pharisees. I give Luther the benefit of the doubt.

You’re correct, there were many reformers before Luther–John Huss, Wycliff in England, Lolards, etc. Most of them were executed by the Roman Catholic Church so their reforms didn’t last long! lol…Luther’s the one that got away from 'em!

 

[mercygate]

does anyone feel that the Roman Catholic church could have been reformed from within or was it too corrupt? the one poster mentioned the plague and how many of the clergy died. certainly that impacted the church because they would have had to replace clergy quickly and many might not have been well trained leading up to the corruption in the 1500’s. however, the church of england was not founded because the roman catholic church was corrupt.
henry might have had a few grievances with Rome, but i think that if Rome would have granted henry the annulment he wanted, most likely england would have remained Catholic. At least for awhile. since Henry did side with the Pope against Luther in the beginning.

I think that had Henry received a decree of nullity, he would have found some other excuse to cash in on the monastic lands whose income was not available to the crown.

As for whether the Church could be reformed from within: It was. The agitators depaerted. We remember the watershed Reformation event as the Council of Trent.

 

[Janet_S]

Good points about the plague but the ‘fact’ that Luther killed a man in a duel sounds like dubious history to me. That sounds about as legit as the old Catholic apocryphal tale where Luther, on his death bed, regretted what he did and embraced the Catholic Church and re-verted. By the way, Mitch Pacwa said so it’s gospel? I hear so many folks quote EWTN personalities as if they’re living apostles.

Also, Father Groeschel is a brilliant man but his opinions are just that, opinions.

When you find the incident of Luther being involved in a duel in an actual historical text documented, let me know. I’ve read volumes on Luther and never heard that one! Sounds pretty far-fetched.
It is entirely possible to have a guilt-ridden conscience and be overly-scrupulous as well as obsessed with holiness without killing somebody.

I hear folks in CAF that obsess about the tiniest sins like Pharisees. I give Luther the benefit of the doubt.

You’re correct, there were many reformers before Luther–John Huss, Wycliff in England, Lolards, etc. Most of them were executed by the Roman Catholic Church so their reforms didn’t last long! lol…Luther’s the one that got away from 'em!

I never said either of these two men (Frs Pacwa or Groeschel) were infallible. I heard these things said about the Reformation, so I put them out there for the sake of discussion. Sorry if you read something more into it than that.

I didn’t have Hus and Wycliff in mind when I mentioned reformers inside the Church, but maybe you think these two are great heroes. They were concerned with the morals of the clergy, but they were disseminating false doctrine too.

No, when I mentioned reformers inside the Church, I was thinking of our saints: especially St Francis of Assisi. Also Sts Philip Neri, Ignatius Loyola, Catherine of Sienna, and Charles Borromeo. Really, when you come to think of it, every holy Catholic is a reformer from inside the Church.

 

[GKC]

I think that had Henry received a decree of nullity, he would have found some other excuse to cash in on the monastic lands whose income was not available to the crown.

As for whether the Church could be reformed from within: It was. The agitators depaerted. We remember the watershed Reformation event as the Council of Trent.

Doubtful. The idea of cashing in on the monasteries (not a totally original one, since Wolsey and Fisher had both closed small houses, and used the funds for other purposes, mainly education) was Thomas Cromwell’s. Cromwell only came to power when Wolsey lost favor for his failure to succeed, in the King’s Great Matter.

Trent, BTW, is a most interesting subject. Like Henry, not a simple one.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I didn’t have Hus and Wycliff in mind when I mentioned reformers inside the Church, but maybe you think these two are great heroes. They were concerned with the morals of the clergy, but they were disseminating false doctrine too.

No, when I mentioned reformers inside the Church, I was thinking of our saints: especially St Francis of Assisi. Also Sts Philip Neri, Ignatius Loyola, Catherine of Sienna, and Charles Borromeo. Really, when you come to think of it, every holy Catholic is a reformer from inside the Church.

That’s putting words in my mouth to say the least. I didn’t say they were heroes LOL, they were “reformers” prior to Luther. The word reformer is accurate, doesn’t mean I buy into their theology. And remember, ‘false doctrine’ according to Rome.

 

[Peter_J]

Good points about the plague but the ‘fact’ that Luther killed a man in a duel sounds like dubious history to me. That sounds about as legit as the old Catholic apocryphal tale where Luther, on his death bed, regretted what he did and embraced the Catholic Church and re-verted.

Have you ever read this? It’s from the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia’s article about Patriarch Photios:

Photius of Constantinople

Photius of Constantinople, chief author of the great schism between East and West, was b. at Constantinople c. 815 (Hergenröther says “not much earlier than 827”, “Photius”, I, 316; others, about 810); d. probably 6 Feb., 897. His father was a spatharios (lifeguard) named Sergius. Symeon Magister (“De Mich. et Theod.”, Bonn ed., 1838, xxix, 668) says that his mother was an escaped nun and that he was illegitimate. He further relates that a holy bishop, Michael of Synnada, before his birth foretold that he would become patriarch, but would work so much evil that it would be better that he should not be born. His father then wanted to kill him and his mother, but the bishop said: “You cannot hinder what God has ordained. Take care for yourself.” His mother also dreamed that she would give birth to a demon. When he was born the abbot of the Maximine monastery baptized him and gave him the name Photius (Enlightened), saying: “Perhaps the anger of God will be turned from him” (Symeon Magister, ibid., cf. Hergenröther, “Photius”, I, 318-19). These stories need not be taken seriously.

 

[jesusluv]

Several people keep mentioning the church corruption in the 1500’s. I’ve never really seen it like that. I have often wondered if he could have reformed the church from within, would Luther have stayed within the church. It may sound very sympathetic to Luther, but I always saw the church as arrogant and above reproach, so it didn’t even pay attention to Luther until it became a real issue. Then the leadership just thought they could squash it and go back to the way it was, and that just didn’t happen. Only after that, did some of the arrogence leave.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Several people keep mentioning the church corruption in the 1500’s. I’ve never really seen it like that. I have often wondered if he could have reformed the church from within, would Luther have stayed within the church. It may sound very sympathetic to Luther, but I always saw the church as arrogant and above reproach, so it didn’t even pay attention to Luther until it became a real issue. Then the leadership just thought they could squash it and go back to the way it was, and that just didn’t happen. Only after that, did some of the arrogence leave.

How could he have reformed from within when he didn’t leave, but was excommunicated?

 

[anon52328184]

when was he excommunicated? did they try to reason with him after he posted his note on the door or did they call him a heretic from that point on?

 

[TriuneUnity]

when was he excommunicated? did they try to reason with him after he posted his note on the door or did they call him a heretic from that point on?

He was excommunicated in late 1521/early 1522 (not sure the exact date) about six months after his hearing at the Diet of Worms. He refused to recant on the doctrine of justification by faith, among others.

 

[anon52328184]

i guess he is lucky that his only punishment was excommunication.

this was many years before king henry viii got involved with Rome. in fact, henry viii was given the title of Defender of the Faith because he took the side of the Pope against martin luther.

i don’t think king henry viii ever really wanted to be excommunicated.

i wonder what martin luther felt about being excommunicated.

luther was also very anti-semitic i think.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Was it the female in vestments that gave it away?

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03hx6Jw1gD8Va/340x.jpg

That doesn’t look right. The first time I saw a female priest in the Anglican Church I was like… yuck…

 

[jesusluv]

i guess he is lucky that his only punishment was excommunication.

this was many years before king henry viii got involved with Rome. in fact, henry viii was given the title of Defender of the Faith because he took the side of the Pope against martin luther.

i don’t think king henry viii ever really wanted to be excommunicated.

i wonder what martin luther felt about being excommunicated.

luther was also very anti-semitic i think.

The majority of Christians were anti-semetic, I don’t like sticking that on Luther like it was his exclusive feelings.

The church excommunicating him is part of the “we are above that” mentality I think was rampant in the heirarchy at the time. He would have ended up dead had he not been whisked away by supporters.

Even though I be RC, I still firmly believe Luther was correct in his initial gripes against the church.

 

[mercygate]

He was excommunicated in late 1521/early 1522 (not sure the exact date) about six months after his hearing at the Diet of Worms. He refused to recant on the doctrine of justification by faith, among others.

Exactly. This was a novel and deviant teaching, and separate from the screaming need for moral reform in a politically and financially corrupt hierarchy.

 

[anon52328184]

That doesn’t look right. The first time I saw a female priest in the Anglican Church I was like… yuck…

she looks really scary in that picture, kind of like a witch or something. the few times i was ever in an episcopal church and there was a female priest,
it just didn’t seem right. i was always used to calling a priest father, but i knew you did not refer to a female priest as mother!! and none of them ever looked like i would want them for a mother either. i think the priesthood should be reserved for males. bishop shiori looks like she is playing dressup.

 

[GKC]

“in fact, henry viii was given the title of Defender of the Faith because he took the side of the Pope against martin luther.”

It was partially because of that, and partially for a couple of other reasons. I’ve posted the full story here a couple of times. Will do it again, if you, like.

GKC

 

[anon52328184]

Exactly. This was a novel and deviant teaching, and separate from the screaming need for moral reform in a politically and financially corrupt hierarchy.

i think from your post, i have just had insight into the reformation. you are saying that there was never a need for reformation of doctrine, just that the church needed to be morally reformed? which could have been done from within? but the reformation also wanted to reform the doctine as well as the moral reform?

 

[anon52328184]

“in fact, henry viii was given the title of Defender of the Faith because he took the side of the Pope against martin luther.”

It was partially because of that, and partially for a couple of other reasons. I’ve posted the full story here a couple of times. Will do it again, if you, like.

GKC

if you like and have the time you can? i don’t think i have read your rendition of the story GKC. would be interested in reading what you have learned.
i will have to read it later though, because i am getting ready to go out for a bit.