A
adf417
Guest
Last edited:
How do protestants explain the time between Christ and the reformation?
- Status
Comparatively speaking, I should have said.
Compared to how embarrassingly divided we are today, the time of the councils shows a Church that is growing, debating, but essentially, one exception that I think of, United.
A
adf417
Guest
Except for the fact the church was NOT united hence the councils discerning the most basic tenets of our/their faith that caused great division.adf417:
Comparatively speaking, I should have said.
Compared to how embarrassingly divided we are today, the time of the councils shows a Church that is growing, debating, but essentially, one exception that I think of, United.
Peace!!!
Would you say we are more united now?JonNC:
Except for the fact the church was NOT united hence the councils discerning the most basic tenets of our/their faith that caused great division.adf417:
Comparatively speaking, I should have said.
Compared to how embarrassingly divided we are today, the time of the councils shows a Church that is growing, debating, but essentially, one exception that I think of, United.
Peace!!!
S
steve-b
Guest
Re: Cajetan, And Jerome, which you are so quick to bring up, that opens the door to address Luther and thesteve-b:
Yes. He had a minority CATHOLIC view of the canon, shared by Cajetan and others. No one was excommunicated for that view prior to Trent.
The rest is irrelevant to the conversation.
So:
The important point of this is, Jerome’s translation of the bible, included the deutero canon (link follows). While Jerome was wrong in the beginning for doubting them, to his defense, the finalized canon hadn’t been decreed yet. HOWEVER, when pope Damasus I, at the council of Rome, decreed the 73 book canon, Jerome included them in the canon of the Vulgate. Jerome ultimately came around to accepting the Deutero canon. THAT is an important point to make.
AND let’s not dismiss
Jerome could not go over the head of a papal decree, [From Jurgens “Faith of the Fathers”, scroll to pg 406 for the list of books] http://books.google.com/books?id=l62q-d4Wi20C&pg=PA405&lpg=PA405&dq=The+Decree +of+Pope+St.+Damasus+I,+Council+of+Rome. +382+A.D&source=bl&ots=ZeUc7S4cIZ&sig=cU TkVsWkzas9JkjusNcC0I1H6Sc&hl=en&sa=X&ei= V2wUVMH3Fo2MyASvuILABQ&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBw#v =onepage&q=The%20Decree%20of%20Pope%20St .%20Damasus%20I%2C%20Council%20of%20Rome .%20382%20A.D&f=false
AND
Re: Cajetan, he was also wrong for doubting them but for a different reason. The canon was decreed and didn’t change since 382. Through local councils and one ecumenical council, it didn’t change. That means the canon didn’t change since 382. Fast forward to Trent. That’s over 1100 yrs with no change in the canon. So just to make the point clear, for all those who are following the revolt, Trent, would end the debate.
What’s important to take away from this is,
- neither Jerome nor Cajetan changed the canon. Do you understand that point?
- Neither one had the power to change the canon. Do you understand THAT as well?
Cajetan looking back in time, could not go over the head of Ecumenical council Florence, Session 11 (1442) , 100 years before Trent that identified All 73 Books of the canon by name, beginning in paragraph 6 of session 11
Do you understand those points being made?
Luther on his own changed the canon in his bible for those in revolt. And to this day, that is the Protestant canon.
Last edited:
Question:
Yes or no, was Cajetan excommunicated for his stated position on the canon?
You know the answer is no. And that is because prior to Trent, that position was permitted. Luther died before Trent and cannot be held accountable to it.
Luther’s position on the canon was essentially the same as Cajetan. I am really quite weary with the double standard expressed on the issue by some Catholic apologists.
One can say Luther and Cajetan were both wrong about the canon, and I generally agree, but to hold them to different standards is disingenuous and uncharitable.
Luther did not change the canon, anymore than Cajetan did. He expressed his opinion about it. He organized his translation differently because of the opinion, but he couldn’t change the canon, anymore than those who excluded the DC’s could. If he changed the canon, then your DRB would look like his Die Bibel. It doesn’t.
Do you understand that Luther did not have the power to change the canon, either?
Last edited:
If you want to have a civil discussion, perhaps these kinds of things should be eliminated from your apologia.
A
adf417
Guest
IDK. I do think your definition of “we” and “united” would be different than mine and would have to be defined first. Also within these definitions, theological unity and practical unity within the respective eras would would need to be considered. Either way im not sure i am qualified to answer that question.
Peace!!!
Fair enough. The “we” I mean is the universal Church Militant. Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, Anglicans, Baptists, Reformed, Anabaptists. All those who confess the Triune God.JonNC:
IDK. I do think your definition of “we” and “united” would be different than mine and would have to be defined first. Also within these definitions, theological unity and practical unity within the respective eras would would need to be considered. Either way im not sure i am qualified to answer that question.
Peace!!!
S
steve-b
Guest
No.steve-b:
Question:
Yes or no, was Cajetan excommunicated for his stated position on the canon?
Had Cajetan kept his position, which he didn’t, he would have been in trouble.
Since you don’t open links, here’s from session 11 , 1442, from the previous post and link
Excerpt:
"Most firmly it believes, professes and preaches that the one true God, Father, Son and holy Spirit, is the creator of all things that are, visible and invisible, who, when he willed it, made from his own goodness all creatures, both spiritual and corporeal, good indeed because they are made by the supreme good, but mutable because they are made from nothing, and it asserts that there is no nature of evil because every nature, in so far as it is a nature, is good. It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.
Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John."
As in 73 books to the canon. The same canon decreed by pope Damasus I, in 382 -----> to Florence in 1440, that’s 1060 years later
No changes, no additions no subtractions to the canon
There’s no double standard. Cajetan didn’t obstinately remain with his views. Luther obstinately did hold to his views. That’s a VERY SIMPLE POINT.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Since you don’t open links you can’t see how terms are used Not a Reformation but a Revolution | Catholic Answerssteve-b:
If you want to have a civil discussion, perhaps these kinds of things should be eliminated from your apologia.
The Church has always been in reform NOT revolt
Last edited:
Before Trent?
I never claimed there was. Your presentation is a deflection from the point. I am not questioning the consistency of the western canon through the centuries.
Got it. Luther should have known the outcome of Trent before he died. That’s apparently what you are saying.
Karl Keating is a Catholic. So let me put it to you this way, for over a decade I have gone out of my way to be very respectful of Catholic teachings and beliefs. I have challenged non-Catholics who have come on here and used terms to define Catholics and your teachings is a way that you don’t.JonNC:
Since you don’t open links you can’t see how terms are used Not a Reformation but a Revolution | Catholic Answerssteve-b:
If you want to have a civil discussion, perhaps these kinds of things should be eliminated from your apologia.
The Church has always been in reform NOT revolt
It is out of courtesy.
Your average western non-Catholic, when referring to the Reformation, use that term.
Common courtesy is appropriate.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
JonNC:
After Trent
JonNC:
By making the canon “geographical” as you do and not universal, you are equalizing differences in the canon.
JonNC:
As I said back HERE we see Luther’s errors listed before the excommunication took place, and way before Luther created his own bible.
Again, The following is why Luther was excommunicated
Luther, Exsurge Domine, Bull of Leo X (1520 ) Luther’s errors
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo10/l10exdom.htm errors listed
He wouldn’t change, so came his excommunication
Decet Romanum Pontificem Leo X ( 1521 )
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo10/l10decet.htm excommunication
As far as creating his own version of his bible, he was already excommunicated from the Church by then.
S
steve-b
Guest
Keating used to be president of CA. I thought he made respectful points.steve-b:
Karl Keating is a Catholic. So let me put it to you this way, for over a decade I have gone out of my way to be very respectful of Catholic teachings and beliefs. I have challenged non-Catholics who have come on here and used terms to define Catholics and your teachings is a way that you don’t.JonNC:
Since you don’t open links you can’t see how terms are used Not a Reformation but a Revolution | Catholic Answerssteve-b:
If you want to have a civil discussion, perhaps these kinds of things should be eliminated from your apologia.
The Church has always been in reform NOT revolt
It is out of courtesy.
Your average western non-Catholic, when referring to the Reformation, use that term.
Common courtesy is appropriate.
The link I provided shows why he thinks the reformation is NOT a reformation. Thousands of divisions later, which (he calls offshoots) , ALL claiming to be the Church, isn’t reformation.
Last edited:
Exactly. Luther cannot be held to that standard.
The canons of the Eastern sees have always been different.
Exactly. His opinion of the canon was irrelevant to his excommunication.
In review.
- he was permitted his opinion of the canon
- Trent ended the liberty of Catholics to views of the canon such as that held by Luther and Cajetan
- Luther cannot be held to Trent because he died prior to Trent’s decision which, by the way, there was significant debate about.
S
steve-b
Guest
Even though This was long after he was excommunicated, He would have come up with his own rules anyway which is what he did.
Luther considered himself his own magisterium. Cajetan did NOT.
True.
His actions at his judgement though, is what he had to worry about.
Last edited:
Polemical nonsense.
And neither of us are at the pay grade needed to determine that.
S
steve-b
Guest
Now THAT is nonsense. Luther was his own boss.steve-b:
Polemical nonsense.
Judgement awaits us all.
Last edited:
- Status