Is the Church to blame for the Reformation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MeInMississippi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MeInMississippi

Guest
What blame, if any, should the Church accept for Protestantism? Is it wrong to think the Church has blame in this matter in either things that were done or things that weren’t? If one thinks that mistakes were made, does that mean he thinks the Church is not infallible?
 
Blessings
The church is not infallible x under certain circumstances. I was told when the Pope sat on his chair and announced a certain dogma-=it is infallible. There are other things.
But, Martin Luther was a monk. He had conviction the church was wrong on some things. He wasn’t planning on leaving Catholicism. He went forward to discuss things. He received no support. So, he wrote his 99 complaints and placed them on the Cathedral door in Worms, Germany.
The church recognizes Luther and his complaints. I’m not sure all of them but some. My church has had 3 Popes at one time. One Pope dug up his predessor and put him on trial and discarded his remains. Good old Borgia… words fail me. I don’t know anything infallible came out of their mouths… God forgive them.
My church had a special sermon on MLK, when it fell on a Sunday. My comments come from that sermon.
Was the Reformation, the churches fault? Yep! Or MLK’s fault? Yep! Really the devils fault.
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
 
Speaking as a historian, the nobility is mostly “to blame for”- the reformation turned early to a power game of aristocrats with independence wishes.
There were issues in the church that needed discussion, but since the 13th century, there were reformative movements in the church without the wish to start a new denominational.
 
Great post, however it’s been widely stated that Luther never intended to start a new denomination. It ended up that way though, because of backlash.
Anyway, woulda coulda shoulda
History is just that.
History.
 
MeInMississippi said:
What blame, if any, should the Church accept for Protestantism? Is it wrong to think the Church has blame in this matter in either things that were done or things that weren’t?
Click to expand...
There is a lot of blame to go around among members of the Church in that era. Some bear more of it than others. Some were churchmen, some were nobility and royalty within various countries. Some had religious motivation, some had avarice as their motivation, some had political aspirations, some had hatred of other people or countries as their motive. There were MANY things going on all at the same time that created the conditions for the Reformation to begin and to flourish rather than to die out like the heresies before them.

But “The Church” isn’t a person. It is made up of many people.
MeInMississippi said:
If one thinks that mistakes were made, does that mean he thinks the Church is not infallible?
Click to expand...
No.
 
The Church is infallible in handing on, expounding on, and defending the deposit of faith. In that sense, there is no good reason for heresy and the other “sins of separation.” On the other hand, the members of the Church, including her leaders, are not impeccable. They sin. It is well-known that at the time of the Reformation, sin abounded. In general, sins can themselves be a catalyst for others committing the sins of separation, as the Catechism says, quoting Origen:

CCC 817
Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271
Click to expand...
Again, this doesn’t absolve those who actually committed the sins of separation, but it means there were likely those who remained within the Church who also incurred their own guilt in the matter. There were also many great Saints who addressed these problems the right way… Where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more.
 
Last edited:
alice24 said:
the reformation turned early to a power game of aristocrats with independence wishes.
Click to expand...
Agreed. This was MOST of the reason it took hold and morphed into something that desired to cut off Rome, authority, and the priesthood.

Something never seen before.
 
MeInMississippi said:
What blame, if any, should the Church accept for Protestantism? Is it wrong to think the Church has blame in this matter in either things that were done or things that weren’t? If one thinks that mistakes were made, does that mean he thinks the Church is not infallible?
Click to expand...
I think it’s an act of humility to acknowledge one’s common participation in the struggles of all people.
In fact, the Church teaches us that all human beings participate in deicide through the crucifixion of Christ. What could be worse?
So taking some responsibility for the human failings that helped lead to the Reformation is not too large a step in comparison.
 
We too often talk about “the” reformation. Regarding Luther, we have different thoughts on the time when he was finally ok with “starting something new” - won´t go that much in detail as these are even among reformation-focused historians differently seen points. Luther was favorized by some local aristocrats and then started to behave like this, too. At this point, he was already far away from the monk with theological questions. A prof once said in a seminary about reformation that we totally overweight Luthers meaning for the reformation - his main effect was reforming and creating an over-territorial german language through his bible translation.
Then we have persons like Jan Hus, who was, little joke among historians, not a hussite himself. The movement after him created a whole bigger wave than he would have liked it. His issue was the communion of the chalice, not starting a denomination. Calvin was one of the more radical reform-oriented people, ready to leave rome for ever, but also with a theology of his own rather than adapted catholic teaching.
To conclude, the whole early modern time in the region of middle and north europe was in huge power struggles, developping, with raising old and new powers and questioned entities. South europe was not that affected from this, because it was completely different in its power structures and the church was not that in the need to face insecurities, reforms and fights in its authority.
A simple answer is not the best in this case.
 
Last edited:
“Is the Church to blame for the Reformation?”
Absolutely not, Martin Luther was just an bad person who wanted to cause trouble.
 
BridgetN said:
Is the Church to blame for the Reformation?”

Absolutely not, Martin Luther was just an bad person who wanted to cause trouble.
Click to expand...
That may be just a tad bit of an oversimplification… 😌

OP: yes, in part. People in the Church - including multiple Popes - made sinful and unwise decisions which both precipitated the Reformation and helped accelerate it once underway.
 
Last edited:
You may be right, but I can’t blame the Church for speeding up the reformation. After all, the Church made a huge statement against Martin Luther…they excommunicated him. But that didn’t stop him…he tore up the bull of excommunication in a awful display of defiance to the Church
 
The magisterium herself has nothing to be blamed for. The bishops who practiced immorality and went against Church teaching are responsible for their actions. And then when it comes to the reformers, they are responsible for theirs.

Right is right, even if everyone is wrong.

Consider St. Francis – he also saw activity in the Church totally off just as Luther did. The difference is that Luther decided to take no responsibility as a priest and broke from the Church. St. Francis on the other hand decided to change himself first so that he could better address what he saw in front of him.

Be like St. Francis – not like Luther.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top