Is the Reformation still continuing today or has it ended?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mannyfit75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jon,

Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t Joel Osteen without any formal training? If so, doesn’t his hugely successful oratory support your pastor’s declaration and add weight to the point being adduced here?

Peace,
Mick
👍
I honestly don’t know his educational background. And I generally have problems watching guys like him. I’d much rather watch EWTN or a Catholic mass, to be honest. I particular don’t like the prosperity types.
Some of these big mega-church tv types do have formal training. It is the local small non-denom types that I was speaking of mostly.
Jon
 
I have now re-read that list of errors for the third time. I think that it is not so much that the Church is opposed to freedom of religion in the sense that the United States has it, where there is no state-sponsored church and no church-sponsored state, and that the government cannot ban a religion unless it is a threat to people. It seems to me that it is saying that there should be no live-and let live attitude. We should not condone people worshipping their cats because they feel called to do so.

It says that it is an error that freedom of religion allows a man to worship whatever his human reason calls him to worship.
 
I have now re-read that list of errors for the third time. I think that it is not so much that the Church is opposed to freedom of religion in the sense that the United States has it, where there is no state-sponsored church and no church-sponsored state, and that the government cannot ban a religion unless it is a threat to people. It seems to me that it is saying that there should be no live-and let live attitude. We should not condone people worshipping their cats because they feel called to do so.

It says that it is an error that freedom of religion allows a man to worship whatever his human reason calls him to worship.
Ralph,

Interesting take. This is delicate ground. Ultimately, I think it boils down to the question as to whether or not error has any rights. Wouldn’t you agree?

Respectfully,
Mick
👍
 
Ralph,

Interesting take. This is delicate ground. Ultimately, I think it boils down to the question as to whether or not error has any rights. Wouldn’t you agree?

Respectfully,
Mick
👍
If you are asking does a man have the right to send himself to hell, yes he does.

If you are asking if he has the right for me to turn a blind eye while he does so, no he does not.
😃
 
Be charitable for God’s sake. Do you really think we are members of a cult or different cults, bum? ( I figured I would use the same terminology as you)
SSTeacher- It depends on who you ask. I won’t get into much further detail, as it might lead to me being banned, but check out the Traditional Catholicism forum for more details.

reteeks- Yes, I do believe you are a part of cults. I never called you a bum though. I said that anyone can become a Protestant minister. So stop inciting anger before you get me banned.
 
SSTeacher- It depends on who you ask. I won’t get into much further detail, as it might lead to me being banned, but check out the Traditional Catholicism forum for more details.

reteeks- Yes, I do believe you are a part of cults. I never called you a bum though. I said that anyone can become a Protestant minister. So stop inciting anger before you get me banned.
It’s a shame that you would call people bums, get mad that they use your terminology, and then tell me to stop cause I make you mad to the point that you say something that will get you banned. That’s mighty big and Christ-like of you. And if being a “real” catholic means being anything like you I will stick my “cult”. By the way, I have never worked to incite anger. If anything, I have given my point of view charitably to everyone, and I love to discuss with anyone and everyone here. The only people I speak to like I have are people like you because YOU are the one who is inciting anger. Learn to use some charity and then maybe you will get a different responses.
 
I think a lot of problems would be solved if we went back to the teachings of the early church fathers but there will always be divisions because there were divisions in the early church, the church today and just about every religion in existence. You can’t always pin it on the protestants.

**The Ancient Fathers on “Sola Scriptura”**St. Irenaeus of Lyons (+ca.195):

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

(Against Heresies, 3:1.1, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, p. 414.)

St. Athanasius (c.296-373):

The holy and inspired Scriptures are fully sufficient for the proclamation of the truth.

(Against the Heathen, I:3, quoted in Carl A. Volz, Faith and Practice in the Early Church [Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1983], p. 147.)

St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c.310-386):

For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless you receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures.

(Catechetical Lectures, IV:17, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983 reprint], Second Series, Vol. VII, p. 23.)

St. Gregory of Nyssa (330-395):

…we are not entitled to such license, namely, of affirming whatever we please. For we make Sacred Scripture the rule and the norm of every doctrine. Upon that we are obliged to fix our eyes, and we approve only whatever can be brought into harmony with the intent of these writings.

(On the Soul and the Resurrection, quoted in Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971], p. 50.)

St. Gregory of Nyssa:

Let the inspired Scriptures then be our umpire, and the vote of truth will be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.

(On the Holy Trinity, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. V, p. 327.)

St. Augustine of Hippo:

What more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For Holy Scripture sets a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behooves to be wise,” but be wise, as he says, “unto soberness, according as unto each God has allotted the measure of faith.”

(On the Good of Widowhood, 2, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. III, p. 442. The quotation is from Romans 12:3.)

St. John Chrysostom:

Regarding the things I say, I should supply even the proofs, so I will not seem to rely on my own opinions, but rather, prove them with Scripture, so that the matter will remain certain and steadfast.

(Homily 8 On Repentance and the Church, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 96, p. 118.)

St. John Chrysostom:

They say that we are to understand the things concerning Paradise not as they are written but in a different way. But when Scripture wants to teach us something like that, it interprets itself and does not permit the hearer to err. I therefore beg and entreat that we close our eyes to all things and follow the canon of Holy Scripture exactly.

(Homily 13 on Genesis.)

St. Basil the Great (c.329-379):

They are charging me with innovation, and base their charge on my confession of three hypostases [persons], and blame me for asserting one Goodness, one Power, one Godhead. In this they are not wide of the truth, for I do so assert. Their complaint is that their custom does not accept this, and that Scripture does not agree. What is my reply? I do not consider it fair that the custom which obtains among them should be regarded as a law and rule of orthodoxy. If custom is to be taken in proof of what is right, then it is certainly competent for me to put forward on my side the custom which obtains here. If they reject this, we are clearly not bound to follow them. Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the Word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth.

(Letter 189 [to Eustathius the physician], 3, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. VIII, p. 229.)

St. Basil the Great:

What is the mark of a faithful soul? To be in these dispositions of full acceptance on the authority of the words of Scripture, not venturing to reject anything nor making additions. For, if “all that is not of faith is sin” as the Apostle says, and “faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God,” everything outside Holy Scripture, not being of faith, is sin.

(The Morals, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 9, p. 204.)

St. Basil the Great:

We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture.

(On the Holy Spirit, 7:16.)

St. John of Damascus (c.675-c.749):

It is impossible either to say or fully to understand anything about God beyond what has been divinely proclaimed to us, whether told or revealed, by the sacred declarations of the Old and New Testaments.

(On the Orthodox Faith, I:2, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 37.)
 
I think a lot of problems would be solved if we went back to the teachings of the early church fathers but there will always be divisions because there were divisions in the early church, the church today and just about every religion in existence. You can’t always pin it on the protestants.

**The Ancient Fathers on “Sola Scriptura”**St. Irenaeus of Lyons (+ca.195):

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

(Against Heresies, 3:1.1, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, p. 414.)

St. Athanasius (c.296-373):

The holy and inspired Scriptures are fully sufficient for the proclamation of the truth.

(Against the Heathen, I:3, quoted in Carl A. Volz, Faith and Practice in the Early Church [Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1983], p. 147.)

St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c.310-386):

For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless you receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures.

(Catechetical Lectures, IV:17, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983 reprint], Second Series, Vol. VII, p. 23.)

St. Gregory of Nyssa (330-395):

…we are not entitled to such license, namely, of affirming whatever we please. For we make Sacred Scripture the rule and the norm of every doctrine. Upon that we are obliged to fix our eyes, and we approve only whatever can be brought into harmony with the intent of these writings.

(On the Soul and the Resurrection, quoted in Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971], p. 50.)

St. Gregory of Nyssa:

Let the inspired Scriptures then be our umpire, and the vote of truth will be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.

(On the Holy Trinity, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. V, p. 327.)

St. Augustine of Hippo:

What more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For Holy Scripture sets a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behooves to be wise,” but be wise, as he says, “unto soberness, according as unto each God has allotted the measure of faith.”

(On the Good of Widowhood, 2, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. III, p. 442. The quotation is from Romans 12:3.)

St. John Chrysostom:

Regarding the things I say, I should supply even the proofs, so I will not seem to rely on my own opinions, but rather, prove them with Scripture, so that the matter will remain certain and steadfast.

(Homily 8 On Repentance and the Church, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 96, p. 118.)

St. John Chrysostom:

They say that we are to understand the things concerning Paradise not as they are written but in a different way. But when Scripture wants to teach us something like that, it interprets itself and does not permit the hearer to err. I therefore beg and entreat that we close our eyes to all things and follow the canon of Holy Scripture exactly.

(Homily 13 on Genesis.)

St. Basil the Great (c.329-379):

They are charging me with innovation, and base their charge on my confession of three hypostases [persons], and blame me for asserting one Goodness, one Power, one Godhead. In this they are not wide of the truth, for I do so assert. Their complaint is that their custom does not accept this, and that Scripture does not agree. What is my reply? I do not consider it fair that the custom which obtains among them should be regarded as a law and rule of orthodoxy. If custom is to be taken in proof of what is right, then it is certainly competent for me to put forward on my side the custom which obtains here. If they reject this, we are clearly not bound to follow them. Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the Word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth.

(Letter 189 [to Eustathius the physician], 3, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. VIII, p. 229.)

St. Basil the Great:

What is the mark of a faithful soul? To be in these dispositions of full acceptance on the authority of the words of Scripture, not venturing to reject anything nor making additions. For, if “all that is not of faith is sin” as the Apostle says, and “faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God,” everything outside Holy Scripture, not being of faith, is sin.

(The Morals, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 9, p. 204.)

St. Basil the Great:

We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture.

(On the Holy Spirit, 7:16.)

St. John of Damascus (c.675-c.749):

It is impossible either to say or fully to understand anything about God beyond what has been divinely proclaimed to us, whether told or revealed, by the sacred declarations of the Old and New Testaments.

(On the Orthodox Faith, I:2, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 37.)
Hmmmm. How come these are never mentioned by our catholic brothers and sisters? ( I mean that sincerely 🙂 )
 
Hmmmm. How come these are never mentioned by our catholic brothers and sisters? ( I mean that sincerely 🙂 )
Because none of these proves the classic “Sola Scriptura” position. They may be used for a Prima Scriptura one, where tradition is acceptable.

Further, each of these men also made statements in the opposite position. Augustine, for example, said that he would not have believed the Gospel had the Church not given it to him. As with any Early Christian writers, they wrote a bunch of stuff directed at a bunch of different people. Context is everything.
 
Because none of these proves the classic “Sola Scriptura” position. They may be used for a Prima Scriptura one, where tradition is acceptable.

Further, each of these men also made statements in the opposite position. Augustine, for example, said that he would not have believed the Gospel had the Church not given it to him. As with any Early Christian writers, they wrote a bunch of stuff directed at a bunch of different people. Context is everything.
So, if they write opposite statements, would that not affect their credibility? Of course the church gave the gospel to Augustine, but where did the gospel come from? And wasn’t he told to “take up and read”? He wasn’t told to go to the church for guidance. He was told to go to the Bible.

*Ralph, please note that I am not arguing against apostolic authority. I am just asking questions.
 
So, if they write opposite statements, would that not affect their credibility? Of course the church gave the gospel to Augustine, but where did the gospel come from? And wasn’t he told to “take up and read”? He wasn’t told to go to the church for guidance. He was told to go to the Bible.

*Ralph, please note that I am not arguing against apostolic authority. I am just asking questions.
NOt really. See, we do not have the context for these quotes. For example, one may be writing in responce to a heretic that says that there is no need for the Sccriptures. Another may be questioning the validity of them. Without the full statements, including historical situations, we cannot know for sure.

Further, just because someone is considered a Doctor of the Church, or Church Father, it does not mean that they are always correct or speak with authority at all. It just means that, when taken as a whole, they contributed greatly to the understanding of the Faith.

Augustine, overall, is a very unique person. He was brilliant, perhaps the smartest man who ever lived. He knew the SCriptures before he had faith. We should not discount the influence that Ambrose had over him, and it is said that reading about Anthony of the Desert profoundly touched him, even moved him to becoming Christian prior to the “take and read” incedent.

Let us take one concept from him and hold it up to the Scriptures, shall we? Augustine held that Mary was ever-virgin and that she was free from sin. Now, does that pass the Scripture test? NOt according to most Protestants. So where does that leave us?
 
I knew that. I should have been a little more specific. Sorry. 😦
No offense taken. I just wanted to clear that up. I’ve been treated like a protestant on CAF a few times because I’m not hostile to the so called “heretics.” 😃
 
NOt really. See, we do not have the context for these quotes. For example, one may be writing in responce to a heretic that says that there is no need for the Sccriptures. Another may be questioning the validity of them. Without the full statements, including historical situations, we cannot know for sure.

Further, just because someone is considered a Doctor of the Church, or Church Father, it does not mean that they are always correct or speak with authority at all. It just means that, when taken as a whole, they contributed greatly to the understanding of the Faith.

Augustine, overall, is a very unique person. He was brilliant, perhaps the smartest man who ever lived. He knew the SCriptures before he had faith. We should not discount the influence that Ambrose had over him, and it is said that reading about Anthony of the Desert profoundly touched him, even moved him to becoming Christian prior to the “take and read” incedent.

Let us take one concept from him and hold it up to the Scriptures, shall we? Augustine held that Mary was ever-virgin and that she was free from sin. Now, does that pass the Scripture test? NOt according to most Protestants. So where does that leave us?
I see what you are saying. One question, though. You said previously that “context is everything.” How does that comment relate to what you say above regarding context? Because if we take them at face value then some could conclude that the Bible is the final authority. If we use what you just said about not knowing the context then one could argue why listen to the church fathers at all. Does that make sense? I am not trying to get you to agree with me. I am just giving a differing view of things.
 
I see what you are saying. One question, though. You said previously that “context is everything.” How does that comment relate to what you say above regarding context?
Good question. I was not expecting that.

There is the rub. The Catholic Church holds that all Scripture must be taken within the context of both the Bible AND the target audiance. It is one reason that we have so much trouble speaking to some Protestants. I am sure that you have heard a Protestant talking about following Jesus and not once mentioning a word that Jesus said.

Those statements that I made about Augustine were out of context. However, they were summations of his writings, not a quote from any particular one. If you take the thing as a whole and paraphrase, some of the context issues do tend to vanish
 
Good question. I was not expecting that.

There is the rub. The Catholic Church holds that all Scripture must be taken within the context of both the Bible AND the target audiance. It is one reason that we have so much trouble speaking to some Protestants. *** I am sure that you have heard a Protestant talking about following Jesus and not once mentioning a word that Jesus said.***

Those statements that I made about Augustine were out of context. However, they were summations of his writings, not a quote from any particular one. If you take the thing as a whole and paraphrase, some of the context issues do tend to vanish
I couldn’t agree more with both the highlited statements. Too often we all pull things out of the air without considering context, especially historical context. And yes, many protestants say things without using the words of Christ as a reference (a total shame!), but we’ve also seen catholics here use only the words of others instead of Christ’s as well. That’s not meant to be a polarizing statement. It’s a just a sad truth for all of us.
 
I couldn’t agree more with both the highlited statements. Too often we all pull things out of the air without considering context, especially historical context. And yes, many protestants say things without using the words of Christ as a reference (a total shame!), but we’ve also seen catholics here use only the words of others instead of Christ’s as well. That’s not meant to be a polarizing statement. It’s a just a sad truth for all of us.
I agree 100%. It can be said that many Protestants and Catholics do tend to take Christ out of their faith: the Protestants by never looking to his teachings and the Catholics by never thinking about him other than at mass.
 
I agree 100%. It can be said that many Protestants and Catholics do tend to take Christ out of their faith: the Protestants by never looking to his teachings and the Catholics by never thinking about him other than at mass.
Let me ask you, Ralph. Was the idea of a “reformation” a good thing? Let’s try not to consider what we know. Let’s just think in context of what was happening in history at that time (ALL of history, not rc history).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top