Foxe's Book of Maryrs and Maryrs' Mirror

[Contarini]

Was Martyr’s Mirror a Protestant classic? I would say no----as Radical points out, the anabaptists had at least as big a problem with other Protestants as they did with Catholics. I’m going to a farm store owned by Mennonites in a few hours, and I know a bunch of other Mennonites----maybe I’ll ask if they still read it.

I think you’ll find that they do.

CopticChristian absolutely has a point about the way these books shape Protestant/Anabaptist identity today (at least among conservatives). I just disagree with him about how to respond–I don’t think that labeling the books “fiction” is either truthful or effective. (Note: I’m not accusing him of falsehood–he has what I find to be an indefensibly broad definition of “fiction” which would make pretty much every premodern work of history fiction.)

Edwin

 

[Radical]

" Metaphorically " ! A figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable , in order to suggest a resemblance .

thanks, but it still makes no sense to me

Well , in post # 8 he described the works as " reliable but biased " ."Reliable " as used here is a little too " squishy " for my taste . How reliable ? Are they orthodox or heterodox ? Perhaps we both could agree to " reliably heterodox " ?

IIRC Contarini was referring to historical accuracy…did the alleged events actually happen? …were these people actually killed b/c of their beliefs?

Perhaps , or perhaps not .

now that is a little too "squishy " for my taste

In addition to the Hussites I thought you also invoked the Cathars/Albigensians .

don’t think so…did you perhaps confuse Anabaptists with Albigensians?

Their official beliefs , of course ! And their official behavior as well !

hmmm, w/o having established their official criteria for officially determining their official teachings and official actions, you are not positioned to say what their official teachings might be…unless you would care to adopt my approach which utilizes historical research and common sense to determine if something that was said and/or done centuries ago was regarded as official by the speaker/doer.

But , I wouldn’t be surprised if you did defend the Cathars . Clearly , the Cathars were no pikers , they gave us a heretical " twofer " . They combined Gnosticism with Manichaeism ( talk about synergy ) . They believed that the world was created by an evil deity , so matter( including the human body ) is evil , and the spirit was created by the good God who should be worshipped . They believed the spirit should be freed from the body .having children was one of the greatest evils , since it entailed imprisoning another spirit in flesh .Logically ( to them ) marriage was forbidden , but fornication was permitted (go figure ) .
But I’m not done , they also encouraged " ritualistic suicide " ( those who would not take their own lives were sometimes " helped along " ) . Cathars also refused to take oaths , which in a feudal society meant they oppsed all governmental authority . Thus Catharism was Both a moral and political danger . This is why both civil and Church authorities opposed them . Weren’t these Cathars swell ? Hail fellows , well met , wouldn’t you say ? Just the type to invite over for a backyard cookout ?

and if a Cathar described the Catholics of that day with the same level of accuracy and selectivity (as you just employed here), the Catholics could very well be the less attractive of the two options…with those Catholics, I just might be the thing thrown on the fire.

Do you personally identify with the Cathars ? Did you think that these were good 12th Century Protestants , Fundamentalists or Bible Christians ? You know , your spiritual ancestors?

not really

For all we know , this may have been considered a " disciplinary " issue ( tough love ) .

yep, that is part of that loosey goosey criteria…don’t like a view, label it disciplinary

WHEN will you provide EVIDENCE that this was a case of the POPE invoking the charism of infallibility ? It is your charge , so when will you actually make your case with EVIDENCE ? BULLS don’t EQUAL infallibility . ALL OFFICIAL Church teaching doesn’t equal infallibility . When the pope speaks infallibly , he lets the whole world KNOW it , you don’t have to guess !.

Oh really? When were the 3 criteria that you reference actually specified in a clear fashion? Before that did the Popes know that they had to meet that criteria to be taken seriously/officially? I will refrain from deciding whether a Pope (in the 1420’s) intended to be speaking officially based on criteria specified centuries later.

I love to be the guy to break it to you , but just because you have no doubt , doesn’t make it so . Have you ever thought of claiming the charism of infallibility for yourself ?

I don’t claim infallibility for myself, but let me use your criteria and I could (if I was so inclined).

Think about it ! I suspect you already function as your own ’ magisterium " !

so do you…you have just delegated the work of clarifying your beliefs to a particular institution…which you can reject at any moment

How are the Church’s criteria for infallibility ( they are not my criteria ) ’ loosey goosey ?

well your first criterion was: (1) he Must speak in his Official capacity as the successor of Peter ;…so to be official, he must speak officially? Sorry, that might be willy nilly and not loosey goosey.

 

[Radical]

Was Martyr’s Mirror a Protestant classic? I would say no----as Radical points out, the anabaptists had at least as big a problem with other Protestants as they did with Catholics. I’m going to a farm store owned by Mennonites in a few hours, and I know a bunch of other Mennonites----maybe I’ll ask if they still read it.

I think you’ll find that they do.

well, this particular Mennonite can assure you that they (both conservative and not) don’t in this part of the globe…for the most part, they will have never heard of the book and it won’t be in their church libraries

CopticChristian absolutely has a point…

Ok, now you have gotten too uncritical

 

[Contarini]

well, this particular Mennonite can assure you that they (both conservative and not) don’t in this part of the globe…for the most part, they will have never heard of the book and it won’t be in their church libraries

Ok, now you have gotten too uncritical

No, I just grew up in very conservative evangelical circles. Foxe was one of the classic texts in my family’s understanding of Christian history–and when I was a teenager we started running into a lot of folks who were more Anabaptist in their leanings and kept pushing MM.

If you don’t come from a certain kind of evangelicalism, or if you haven’t encountered it as many of the Catholics on this forum have encountered it, you are going to think that the Catholics here are overreacting. Or more precisely (since I agree that they overreact), you aren’t going to understand what they are overreacting to.

Edwin

 

[AbideWithMe]

No, I just grew up in very conservative evangelical circles. Foxe was one of the classic texts in my family’s understanding of Christian history–and when I was a teenager we started running into a lot of folks who were more Anabaptist in their leanings and kept pushing MM.

If you don’t come from a certain kind of evangelicalism, or if you haven’t encountered it as many of the Catholics on this forum have encountered it, you are going to think that the Catholics here are overreacting. Or more precisely (since I agree that they overreact), you aren’t going to understand what they are overreacting to.

Edwin

Well, I didn’t ask at the Mennonite farm store if Martyrs Mirror continues to be commonly read—I didn’t see anyone there that I knew well enough to make my inquiry. I’m still curious about that. I live in Berks County, PA, two miles from the first North American Amish settlement; my brother works at a large Mennonite-owned resort in Lancaster County, PA…I interact with Mennonites at least weekly, and have some as neighbors, yet they are simultaneously familiar and mysterious to me. I have to say, they are friendly, merry, and have a good sense of humor and playfulness. They don’t seem separatists, really—the reason they seem a bit mysterious, religion-wise, to me has more to do with my own reticence than theirs.

Yes, Contarini, at first I did think many Catholics here were overreacting. It’s been interesting to me, hearing from Catholics living in different parts of the US and the world; anti-Catholic sentiment from Protestants isn’t something I’ve grown up with. I 've always seen Catholics and Protestants working well together here in this part of the Quaker state. I’ve had close Catholic friends since I was a teenager, and questioning the validity of each other’s Christian faith, as I’ve seen here, isn’t something I’ve experienced before.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

Right. It’s rather absurd to say you are defending against things that happened 200 years ago.

Edwin

“200 years ago.”? What about the Moorish Muslim invasion and occupation of Spain starting at 711 A.D. till 1492 A.D.?

 

[CopticChristian]

well, this particular Mennonite can assure you that they (both conservative and not) don’t in this part of the globe…for the most part, they will have never heard of the book and it won’t be in their church libraries

Ok, now you have gotten too uncritical

Oh, you are a Mennonite…

Well I did ask the question as to why Brad S. Gregory wrote “Salvation at Stake”. I also asked who is this guy. I had never heard of him. He probably never heard of me. This is who he is.

**Brad S. Gregory is the Dorothy G. Griffin Associate Professor of Early Modern European History at the University of Notre Dame. He received his Ph.D. from Princeton University (1996) and was a Junior Fellow in the Harvard Society of Fellows (1994-96). Before joining the faculty at Notre Dame in 2003, Gregory taught at Stanford University, where he received early tenure in 2001. Gregory has two degrees in philosophy as well, both earned at the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium. He has received teaching awards at Stanford and Notre Dame, and in 2005 was named the inaugural winner of the Hiett Prize in the Humanities from the Dallas Institute of Humanities and Culture as the outstanding mid-career humanities scholar in the United States. Gregory’s research focuses on Christianity in the Reformation era, the long-term effects of the Reformation, secularization in early modern and modern Western history, and methodology in the study of religion. **

These are a few of the books he wrote. There are more. You can view his avaialble books and stuff on Amazon. It is impressive.

**The Unintended Reformation: How a Religious Revolution Secularized Society

Seeing Things Their Way: Intellectual History and the Return of Religion

The Forgotten Writings of the Mennonite Martyrs (Kerkhistorische Bijdragen 18, Documenta Anabaptistica, 8)

Journeys of Faith: Evangelicalism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Anglicanism**

I reasoned that after viewing “Salvation at Stake”, seeing who he was, it was clear that a Philosopher/Historian was the kind of guy I like to read and know about. I will probably spend more time getting to know his work. He is honest, appears to have no bias I can see and he knows more about something I know less about and should fill some holes in my map.

So why did Stephens write the book. He is a historian. Now compare and contrast that with what you find about van Braght. Not much out there and Stephens points similar notions out as well.

ccel.org/v/vanbraght

According to modern standards his method of work was not scholarly; he accepted and published whole articles without checking their accuracy, and was historically inexact. His preferences and aversions also played a part. It must not be forgotten that he wrote for the purpose of edifying.

I will continue to develop my response to Radical.

I have toyed with reframing the notion of heretic and believe that the Orthodox Church has influenced me. Orthodoxy is right thinking. Repent is to change your mind. Heresy does not truly address the notion of the mind and thinking in the sense that the word is thrown around here and there. I have come across writings in the Church that lend a different bent to this notion and include the thoughts I have put forth…the Hussites will have to wait.

 

[CopticChristian]

Well, I didn’t ask at the Mennonite farm store if Martyrs Mirror continues to be commonly read—I didn’t see anyone there that I knew well enough to make my inquiry. I’m still curious about that. I live in Berks County, PA, two miles from the first North American Amish settlement; my brother works at a large Mennonite-owned resort in Lancaster County, PA…I interact with Mennonites at least weekly, and have some as neighbors, yet they are simultaneously familiar and mysterious to me. I have to say, they are friendly, merry, and have a good sense of humor and playfulness. They don’t seem separatists, really—the reason they seem a bit mysterious, religion-wise, to me has more to do with my own reticence than theirs.

Yes, Contarini, at first I did think many Catholics here were overreacting. It’s been interesting to me, hearing from Catholics living in different parts of the US and the world; anti-Catholic sentiment from Protestants isn’t something I’ve grown up with. I 've always seen Catholics and Protestants working well together here in this part of the Quaker state. I’ve had close Catholic friends since I was a teenager, and questioning the validity of each other’s Christian faith, as I’ve seen here, isn’t something I’ve experienced before.

I am a cradle Catholic, went to a Catholic grade school, High School, learned from the Baltimore Catechism and never in any of my studies was I ever taught about anyone elses belief or why they were wrong. I was never given any literature, book, advice or any other information as to heretical thinking, apostasy, or any such thing. I just knew that there were words like that and they existed.

I find it odd that part of many Protestant’s upbringing and teaching is part and parcel of a dislike for the Catholic Church. It is part of the Protestant map, the paradigm, the oral tradition.

I studied Science and never learned as I learned it that those that oppose science are idiots.

I studied Medicine and never had classes or propaganda against Chriopractors, Homeopaths, Naturopaths or any other alternative medicine schools.

I suppose you may consider reacting to this as over reacting and the reason is that is it foreign to Orthodoxy, right thinking.

 

[CopticChristian]

Foxe’s Book of Maryrs and Maryrs’ Mirror are two Protestant classics that purport to narrate the brave struggles of Bible-believing Evangelicals across the centuries, seemingly implying that the Protestant belief system was present from the beginning and was persecuted by the CC over the centuries.

What are your views of these “histories”? Are they reliable but biased? Falsified?

Has the CC made any statements regarding the truth or falsity of any of the contents of these books?

So may I ask if you agree or disagree with the following…any may comment as well…

Baptism is the only sign and proof of incorporation into the visible Church and without it no one, whomever they may be or whatever they may profess or no matter how holy or how pious they may be, without Baptism they cannot be recognized as a true member of the Church. The Lord declares through Baptism the washing away of sinful corruption of the shoul, through the shedding of the blood of Christ. Our sins are buried into the death of Christ.
Romans 6

1What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: 6Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. 7For he that is dead is freed from sin.

Catholic Catechism

ARTICLE 1 - THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua),[4] and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: “Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word.”[5]

Agree, disagree?

 

[AbideWithMe]

I am a cradle Catholic, went to a Catholic grade school, High School, learned from the Baltimore Catechism and never in any of my studies was I ever taught about anyone elses belief or why they were wrong. I was never given any literature, book, advice or any other information as to heretical thinking, apostasy, or any such thing. I just knew that there were words like that and they existed.

I find it odd that part of many Protestant’s upbringing and teaching is part and parcel of a dislike for the Catholic Church. It is part of the Protestant map, the paradigm, the oral tradition. :

CopticChristian----

No. You are mistaken here. “Dislike for the Catholic Church” may be part of some Protestants’ upbringings. I don’t think you are equipped or qualified to make an accurate judgment about how widespread “dislike for the Catholic Church” is among Protestants. Why do you believe you are?

As for “It (dislike for the Catholic Church) is part of the Protestant map, the paradigm, the oral tradition”----No, again, a degree of disagreement is not to be confused with “dislike”; you’re conflating two different things.

 

[CopticChristian]

CopticChristian----

No. You are mistaken here. “Dislike for the Catholic Church” may be part of some Protestants’ upbringings. I don’t think you are equipped or qualified to make an accurate judgment about how widespread “dislike for the Catholic Church” is among Protestants. Why do you believe you are?

As for “It (dislike for the Catholic Church) is part of the Protestant map, the paradigm, the oral tradition”----No, again, a degree of disagreement is not to be confused with “dislike”; you’re conflating two different things.

No, I just grew up in very conservative evangelical circles. Foxe was one of the classic texts in my family’s understanding of Christian history

–and when I was a teenager we started running into a lot of folks who were more Anabaptist in their leanings and kept pushing MM.

If you don’t come from a certain kind of evangelicalism, or if you haven’t encountered it as many of the Catholics on this forum have encountered it, you are going to think that the Catholics here are overreacting. Or more precisely (since I agree that they overreact), you aren’t going to understand what they are overreacting to.

First, your response did not include the entire post that I responded to. I responded to Contarini’s statement and your response. Growing up on a steady diet of Martyr’s Mirror and Foxe is anti-Catholic.

I stated …

I find it odd that part of many Protestant’s upbringing and teaching is part and parcel of a dislike for the Catholic Church. It is part of the Protestant map, the paradigm, the oral tradition. :

You deleted this portion of understanding from your response.

Let me reframe the concept of “dislike”… I should have said that Protestant thought is anti-Catholic and that part and parcel of the map/paradigm of Protestant thought is anti-Catholic. Many Protestants are blatantly anti-Catholic in their sentiment in rearing their children and some are anit-Catholic without knowing it. I am not mistaken.

second…this site Catholic Answers is the result of a geneleman named Karl Keating who long ago wrote a book “Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians”…”. If you have not read it you should. Why might you think he should have written this book?

third…you state you are a Christian in your identity. Jesus was an asian Jew. Christianity is an Eastern Religion. You attend The Evangelical Free Church of America and were reared in a home where you attended an Evangelical Church. John Knox, Martin Luther, John Calvin were Catholic and they rebelled in 1600. Connect the dots from the Eastern religion of Christianity to the Evangelical Free Church of America for me as to the origin of your beliefs.

fourth…concerning the Apostles Creed…

1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth:

1. And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord:

1. Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary:

1. Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead and buried: He descended into hell:

1. The third day he rose again from the dead:

1. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty:

1. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead:

1. I believe in the Holy Ghost:

1. I believe in the holy catholic church: the communion of saints:

1. The forgiveness of sins:

1l. The resurrection of the body:

1. And the life everlasting. Amen.

Do you accept it, reject it, believe that anyone has the right to change it and if they change it, is that change a fact of history or a fiction?

 

[AbideWithMe]

First, your response did not include the entire post that I responded to. I responded to Contarini’s statement and your response. Growing up on a steady diet of Martyr’s Mirror and Foxe is anti-Catholic.

I stated …

You deleted this portion of understanding from your response.

Let me reframe the concept of “dislike”… I should have said that Protestant thought is anti-Catholic and that part and parcel of the map/paradigm of Protestant thought is anti-Catholic. Many Protestants are blatantly anti-Catholic in their sentiment in rearing their children and some are anit-Catholic without knowing it. I am not mistaken.

second…this site Catholic Answers is the result of a geneleman named Karl Keating who long ago wrote a book “Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians”…”. If you have not read it you should. Why might you think he should have written this book?

third…you state you are a Christian in your identity. Jesus was an asian Jew. Christianity is an Eastern Religion. You attend The Evangelical Free Church of America and were reared in a home where you attended an Evangelical Church. John Knox, Martin Luther, John Calvin were Catholic and they rebelled in 1600. Connect the dots from the Eastern religion of Christianity to the Evangelical Free Church of America for me as to the origin of your beliefs.

fourth…concerning the Apostles Creed…

Do you accept it, reject it, believe that anyone has the right to change it and if they change it, is that change a fact of history or a fiction?

Hello CopticChristian—I hope you are having a blessed Christmas Eve.

To start with the last subject, the Apostle’s Creed----Yes, I accept it and say it. It is the touchstone of orthodox Christian faith.

Next, as to the topic one up from the end of your post—Yes, I attend an Evangelical Free Church. My reading, since my early teens, has encompassed Catholic and Orthodox writings, both ancient and modern, along with Protestant authors. My dad was raised Jewish, and so I’ve been curious about Judaism as well; Jewish authors–ancient and modern again—have had a large impact on me.

I’ve said this several times before here at CAF, but I’ll say it again: my pastors have always encouraged me to read Catholic authors for my spiritual formation—EFCs through modern writers. The Protestant authors I read most as I was growing up----C.S.Lewis and Phillip Yancey among others —certainly can’t be called anti-Catholic by any stretch of the imagination.

Foxe’s book and Martyr’s Mirror were never even mentioned by anyone in any church I’ve been in. I asked my 75 year old mom tonight if she knew of them. She’s learned and intelligent, a teacher from a family of teachers and farmers. She’s been very involved in her church and in inter-church cooperation, her family is Lutheran, and she had older relatives who were Lutheran ministers. She told me she’d heard vaguely of Foxe, but didn’t know what the book was about. Martyr’s Mirror was completely unknown to her.

The point I was trying to make in my earlier post wasn’t a denial that some Protestants may have had some degree of an anti-Catholic attitude instilled by how they were raised. Contarini specified that his experience with MM came through growing up with a certain type of very conservative evangelical background. For the many Protestants who don’t grown up in the same soil, your generalizations are very problematic. That was what I was trying to communicate.

To be continued…

 

[CopticChristian]

Hello CopticChristian—I hope you are having a blessed Christmas Eve.

To start with the last subject, the Apostle’s Creed----Yes, I accept it and say it. It is the touchstone of orthodox Christian faith.
Next, as to the topic one up from the end of your post—Yes, I attend an Evangelical Free Church. My reading, since my early teens, has encompassed Catholic and Orthodox writings, both ancient and modern, along with Protestant authors. My dad was raised Jewish, and so I’ve been curious about Judaism as well; Jewish authors–ancient and modern again—have had a large impact on me.

I’ve said this several times before here at CAF, but I’ll say it again: my pastors have always encouraged me to read Catholic authors for my spiritual formation—EFCs through modern writers. The Protestant authors I read most as I was growing up----C.S.Lewis and Phillip Yancey among others —certainly can’t be called anti-Catholic by any stretch of the imagination.

Foxe’s book and Martyr’s Mirror were never even mentioned by anyone in any church I’ve been in. I asked my 75 year old mom tonight if she knew of them. She’s learned and intelligent, a teacher from a family of teachers and farmers. She’s been very involved in her church and in inter-church cooperation, her family is Lutheran, and she had older relatives who were Lutheran ministers. She told me she’d heard vaguely of Foxe, but didn’t know what the book was about. Martyr’s Mirror was completely unknown to her.

The point I was trying to make in my earlier post wasn’t a denial that some Protestants may have had some degree of an anti-Catholic attitude instilled by how they were raised. Contarini specified that his experience with MM came through growing up with a certain type of very conservative evangelical background. For the many Protestants who don’t grown up in the same soil, your generalizations are very problematic. That was what I was trying to communicate.

To be continued…

I pray your Christmas is blessed as well…

I asked concerning the Creed…

Do you accept it, reject it, believe that anyone has the right to change it and if they change it, is that change a fact of history or a fiction

You accept it. Do you believe that anyone has the right to change it?
If they change the Creed is that change fact of history or is the change fiction?

 

[AbideWithMe]

First, your response did not include the entire post that I responded to. I responded to Contarini’s statement and your response. Growing up on a steady diet of Martyr’s Mirror and Foxe is anti-Catholic.

I stated …

You deleted this portion of understanding from your response.

Let me reframe the concept of “dislike”… I should have said that Protestant thought is anti-Catholic and that part and parcel of the map/paradigm of Protestant thought is anti-Catholic. Many Protestants are blatantly anti-Catholic in their sentiment in rearing their children and some are anit-Catholic without knowing it. I am not mistaken.

second…this site Catholic Answers is the result of a geneleman named Karl Keating who long ago wrote a book “Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians”…”. If you have not read it you should. Why might you think he should have written this book?

Moving up your post to your second subject----CopticChristian, I haven’t read that book from Karl Keating, though I heard of it on another forum. Please note the “Fundamentalism” in the title. The majority of Protestants are not fundamentalists. So, again, I am not taking issue with the fact that some Protestants are anti-Catholic. I’m asking you to be more careful with your use of “many”, because it is a too-broad generalization that does more harm than good by denying the work of the Holy Spirit.

'The work of the Holy Spirit", you may wonder?..what is she talking about? I mean that, if required, I can give you evidence that the Protestant world is less anti-Catholic than you seem to think. And that --the lessening of anti-Catholicism within Protestants—is the work of the Holy Spirit. If you insist on stating that Protestant anti-Catholicism is more wide-spread than it actually is; if you ignore evidence that many Protestants are maturing into a more Christian love for their Catholic and Orthodox brothers, then it is the Holy Spirit’s work you ignore.

 

[CopticChristian]

Moving up your post to your second subject----CopticChristian, I haven’t read that book from Karl Keating, though I heard of it on another forum. Please note the “Fundamentalism” in the title. The majority of Protestants are not fundamentalists. So, again, I am not taking issue with the fact that some Protestants are anti-Catholic. I’m asking you to be more careful with your use of “many”, because it is a too-broad generalization that does more harm than good by denying the work of the Holy Spirit.

'The work of the Holy Spirit", you may wonder?..what is she talking about? I mean that, if required, I can give you evidence that the Protestant world is less anti-Catholic than you seem to think. And that --the lessening of anti-Catholicism within Protestants—is the work of the Holy Spirit. If you insist on stating that Protestant anti-Catholicism is more wide-spread than it actually is; if you ignore evidence that many Protestants are maturing into a more Christian love for their Catholic and Orthodox brothers, then it is the Holy Spirit’s work you ignore.

I believe you see what you see and believe what you believe. Your experience with the Reading project is not the cosmos. I can suggest that all baptized Christians are gifted with Faith, Hope and Charity and what you are experiencing is the grace of Charity as it regards the works you are experiencing in that project.

This is the cry of the Mormons. Look at our fruits they say as evidence of work of the Holy Spirit. If Mormons join your Reading group does that give credibility to Mormon theology?

You have neglected to connect the dots from the Asian Jew/Jesus to 1600 to a Evangelical Church in America. Do this so we can have proper dialogue. Here is what I find.

Our History
The Evangelical Free Church of America was formed June 18, 1950 by the merger of two church bodies: the Evangelical Free Church of America (Swedish) and the Norwegian-Danish Evangelical Free Church Association. Both groups had been birthed in the revival movements of the late nineteenth century.
The Swedish group had its formal beginnings in Boone, Iowa, at a conference held in October of 1884. In that same year, two Norwegian-Danish groups began to worship and fellowship together in Boston, Massachusetts and Tacoma, Washington. By 1912, both the Swedish Evangelical Free Church and the Norwegian-Danish Evangelical Free Church Association had been formed.
Those two associations, representing 275 local congregations, were formally joined together as they gathered for a merger conference in June of 1950 at the Medicine Lake Conference Grounds near Minneapolis, Minnesota. The international and national offices of the EFCA have been located in Minneapolis since the merger took place

Here is a statement of Faith…article concerning the Bible.

The Bible
2. We believe that God has spoken in the Scriptures (Matt. 1:22; 4:4; 19:4,5; Heb. 1:1-
2), both Old and New Testaments (2 Pet. 3:15,16), through the words of human
authors (Lk. 1:1-4). As the verbally inspired Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet.
1:20,21), the Bible is without error in the original writings (Num. 23:19; 2 Sam. 7:28;
Prov. 30:5; Ps. 119:96, 160; Matt. 5:18; Jn. 10:35; 17:17; Tit. 1:1,2), the complete
revelation of His will for salvation (Lk. 16:29-31; Gal. 1:8,9; 2 Tim. 3:15), and the
ultimate authority by which every realm of human knowledge and endeavor should
be judged (Jn. 17:17; 1 Tim. 3:15-17; 1 Pet. 1:23; Ps. 119:44,45,165). Therefore, it is to
be believed in all that it teaches (Matt. 22:29; Rom. 15:4; 2 Tim. 3:16), obeyed in all
that it requires (Matt. 28:20; 2 Thess. 3:14; 1 Jn. 2:5), and trusted in all that it
promises (Rom. 1:2; 4:21; Heb. 10:23; 2 Pet. 1:4; 3:13).

Bible
A. We believe God has spoken in the Scriptures through the words of human
authors (Matt. 1:22; 4:4; 19:4,5; Lk. 1:1-4; Heb. 1:1-2).
2
B. We believe the Scriptures, the Word of God, the Bible consist of both Old and
New Testaments (Matt. 5:17-20; Lk. 24:44; 1 Tim. 5:17-18; 2 Pet. 3:15, 16).
C. We believe the Bible, as the verbally inspired Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet.
1:20, 21), is without error in the original writings (2 Sam. 7:28; Prov. 30:5; Num.
23:19; Ps. 119:89, 96; Matt. 5:18; Jn. 10:35; 17:17; Tit. 1:1,2).
D. We believe the Bible is the complete revelation of God’s will for salvation (Isa.
40:6, 8; Lk. 16:29-31; Gal. 1:8,9; 2 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 1:1-2; 1 Pet. 1:24-25).
E. We believe the Bible is the ultimate authority by which every realm of human
knowledge and endeavor should be judged (Ps. 12:6; 119:160; Matt. 24:35; Jn.
17:17; 1 Tim. 3:15-17; 1 Pet. 1:23).

The Bible teaches that Jesus would found a Church not an Evangelical association in Sweden. The Bible teaches that the Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth and this Evangelical statement of Faith puts the Bible above the Church as sole authority. The bible was birthed by the Church. The Bible did not produce the Church. Paul says that the Church is the mystery hidden for all ages through which the manifold wisdom of God is known. Did we have to wait for Sweden to form this union to realize this mystery and see the manifold wisdom of God? This is Protestant Sola Scriptura that is subtley anti-Catholic.

 

[CopticChristian]

Moving up your post to your second subject----CopticChristian, I haven’t read that book from Karl Keating, though I heard of it on another forum. Please note the “Fundamentalism” in the title. The majority of Protestants are not fundamentalists. So, again, I am not taking issue with the fact that some Protestants are anti-Catholic. I’m asking you to be more careful with your use of “many”, because it is a too-broad generalization that does more harm than good by denying the work of the Holy Spirit.

'The work of the Holy Spirit", you may wonder?..what is she talking about? I mean that, if required, I can give you evidence that the Protestant world is less anti-Catholic than you seem to think. And that --the lessening of anti-Catholicism within Protestants—is the work of the Holy Spirit. If you insist on stating that Protestant anti-Catholicism is more wide-spread than it actually is; if you ignore evidence that many Protestants are maturing into a more Christian love for their Catholic and Orthodox brothers, then it is the Holy Spirit’s work you ignore.

While your contemplating…look at your statement of Faith.

the Bible is without error in the original writings

Where are the original writings? Who had them before Knox, Zwingli, Calvin and Luther, Wycliff were born? Who or what preserved them prior to this time?

Next look at your bible proofs for the bible as the inspired wordl. 2Tim 3:16 only proves that whatever Timothy read as a child was Scripture. Peter 1:20, 21 says that there should be no private interpretation. How do you know that the Bible you have in your hand is truly the Bible and word of God? How do you know who wrote Mark or Hebrews? Who said it is Scripture?

C. We believe the Bible, as the verbally inspired Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet.
1:20, 21),

I wait patiently.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Hi CopticChristian----

You’ve asked me alot of questions. Though I like to read, I’m not much of a verbal communicator. So, can you narrow the questions down, or at least fill me in on how you see them as directly pertaining to this thread?

Can you also define what you mean by anti-Catholicism? How is this definition from Wiki: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism

Here is another: www2.trincoll.edu/~dcruzuri/anti-catholic/anti-catholic.html

The second link is to the work of a lay Franciscan brother who lists anti-catholic internet sites. If you go to the link I have here and then move on to the actual list of sites, he says this:

"Religious anti-Catholicism is rooted in the Reformation, and was once an acceptable part of most Protestant denominations. Since the advent of the ecumenical movement after World War II, and especially since Vatican II in the early 1960’s, anti-Catholicism has either quietly faded or been explicitly dropped from the majority of Protestant churches. The people, churches, and organizations listed below are very conservative Protestant Christians, with many (and possibly a majority) being fundamentalists…

I would agree with what he’s saying. I take it you would not?

Edit: for second link, go to the “Religious anti-Catholic websites” list to get to the context of the part I quoted.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Here’s a link to The Berean Call, a decidedly anti-Catholic website, taking the Evangelical writer Philip Yancey to task for looking to Catholic writers. I had this sort of thing in mind when I wrote of evidence that anti-Catholicism is losing ground among Protestants. Philip Yancey is one the foremost Evangelical writers today, and has been for years.

thebereancall.org/node/2626

 

[CopticChristian]

Hi CopticChristian----

You’ve asked me alot of questions. Though I like to read, I’m not much of a verbal communicator. So, can you narrow the questions down, or at least fill me in on how you see them as directly pertaining to this thread?

Can you also define what you mean by anti-Catholicism? How is this definition from Wiki: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism

Here is another: trincoll.edu/~dcruzuri/anti-catholic/anti-catholic.html

The second link is to the work of a lay Franciscan brother who lists anti-catholic internet sites. If you go to the link I have here and then move on to the actual list of sites, he says this:

"Religious anti-Catholicism is rooted in the Reformation, and was once an acceptable part of most Protestant denominations. Since the advent of the ecumenical movement after World War II, and especially since Vatican II in the early 1960’s, anti-Catholicism has either quietly faded or been explicitly dropped from the majority of Protestant churches. The people, churches, and organizations listed below are very conservative Protestant Christians, with many (and possibly a majority) being fundamentalists…

I would agree with what he’s saying. I take it you would not?

Certainly,

In understanding Pharmacology drugs are difficult to understand and know when you consider that there are so many. The taxonomy of drugs is by their action and in particular what they prevent. The classes of drugs are ANTIbiotic, ANTIseizure, ANTIinflammatory, etc…they describe what a drug prevents.

Paul says that the truth is important…and suppression of the truth is not to be held as something one should do…

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Jesus was an Asian Jew. Christianity is an Eastern religion. Jesus said he would found a Church, the pillar and foundation of truth, the mystery hidden for all ages, the mystery by which all would be reconciled to Himself, the mystery through which the manifold wisdom of God is to be known…where when disagreement is found we take it to the Church. The Church is the Body of Christ. Only one Head. Only one Body. Jesus is the way the truth and the light. One Lord, One Faith One Baptism.

So if the Bible is the word of God, if the Bible says that the Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth, The Church is the Body of Christ, there can be only one body…the Church is Universal/Catholic and there is only one…then

Protestant thought is anti-truth, anti-Catholic.

Work through how it is you accept the Bible as the Bible. As far as Martyrs Mirror goes it is part and parcel of the deception and word play keeping people from the truth…for example…

1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth:

1. And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord:

1. Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary:

1. Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead and buried: He descended into hell:

1. The third day he rose again from the dead:

1. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty:

1. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead:

1. I believe in the Holy Ghost:

1. I believe in the holy general christian church: the communion of saints:

1. The forgiveness of sins:

1l. The resurrection of the body:

1. And the life everlasting. Amen.

van Braght changed the Apostles Creed to fit the needs of the Menononites and is not the truth…this is suppresion of the truth and anti-truth…as the book itself is anti-Catholic.

Consider this. van Braght wrote a book on Adult Baptism and nothing about articles of Faith. This was the criteria and this is why Catholics are included in early chapters. It stands to reason that Mormons, 7th day adventists and Oneness Pentacostals could claim this book as their own as practitioners of adult baptism.

It also stands to reason that if there is a tome on Adult Baptism then there should be a similar and parallel work on those that died that professed Infant Baptism…This book would then validate that the following died for Infant Baptism…

Denominations that practise infant baptism include the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, Armenian Apostolic Church, Assyrian Church of the East, the Anglican churches, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, some Church of the Nazarene the Reformed Church in America the United Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ (UCC), and the Continental Reformed.

In other words Martyrs Mirror is an anti-Catholic work shrouded in the notion that the Menonites believed in Adult Baptism and reading this book should provide those today that persecution should strengthen their faith. Martyrs Mirror speaks poorly of the Calvinists and the others that baptized babies so a book that included all those that died having professed infant baptism would be contrary to this book. What does this book prove?

What is fascinating is that the Lutherans claim Jan Hus as having been baptized as an Infant as a reason for infant baptism and Hussites at least 2 factions did not baptize babies, only the ones that joined the Lutherans. The Hussites are not spoken well of in Martyrs Mirror.

Suppression of the truth is Anti-Catholic.

 

[CopticChristian]

Here’s a link to The Berean Call, a decidedly anti-Catholic website, taking the Evangelical writer Philip Yancey to task for looking to Catholic writers. I had this sort of thing in mind when I wrote of evidence that anti-Catholicism is losing ground among Protestants. Philip Yancey is one the foremost Evangelical writers today, and has been for years.

thebereancall.org/node/2626

So let’s see. I left the Catholic Church because I could not pray correctly…well I have an answer for that.

It wasn’t until, honestly, as a Roman Catholic that I started hanging around with evangelical young people and I would hear their prayers and I would think, What are these guys doing, God doesn’t answer prayers like that. And God would answer their prayers, and I saw Him work in my own life even before coming to Christ in answers to their prayers. So, this really makes me upset.

He probably did not read his Bible…

Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.
27And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

Too many of us do not know how to pray as we should and sometimes even our groans are prayers. St. Paul would never have told someone to leave the OHCAC because he could not pray or because of the envy of what others did. Show me one passage in the Bible where someone left the Old Covenant or the New Covenant because they could not pray as they ought.

I hope Phil Yancey finds his way back to the truth when he learns his prayers. I am going to try to send him a copy of “Evangelical is not Enough”…Worship of God in Liturgy and Sacrament" by Thomas Howard. Have you read this? I have a copy right here.

Here is what he says in his postscript…

"The question What is the Church? becomes, finally, intractable; and one finds oneself unable to offer any very telling reasons why the phrase “one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic, " which we all say in the Creed, is to be understood in any way than the way in which it was understood for 1500 years…Yes, I believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the Ancient Church. I accept its claims.”:grouphug:

he goes on to say

“I believe that here one finds the fullness (“catholicity”) of the Faith. Hence, I mourn the splintering in Christendom. I pray for the reunion of Christ’s Church”.

Now if these evangelical kids were having their prayers answered and this is what caused Yancy to leave the truth…let me know where I can write to these kids to ask them to pray for the reunion of Christ’s Church. I am all for miracles.

Would you like a copy. I will send you one free.