Looking Back at what the Reformation has Done

[Lucy107]

A priest once said someone said just such as a comment as you did to him and he said "God forbid anyone think it’s of our own doing the Church has prevailed in truth for so long"

Interesting.

Based on my experience with Catholics, it seems it’s the Catholics themselves who are eager to take all the credit, and the references to the Holy Spirit are just an obligatory formal pious exaggeration that they don’t take seriously.

 

[MaryT777]

Interesting.

Based on my experience with Catholics, it seems it’s the Catholics themselves who are eager to take all the credit, and the references to the Holy Spirit are just an obligatory formal pious exaggeration that they don’t take seriously.

Oh good grief. I would faint if I heard a Catholic take all the credit for the Church and its truth. It seems to me that your experience with Catholics has been not good and at best
“bad” for lack of a better word. I am sorry for that. There is no such Catholic teaching that
we get credit for the work of the Holy Spirit.

This is getting a little off topic but I do want to post this for you. It’s short and to the point and if you have ?'s or have had any problems with the Church post a thread about the topic in the forum it fits best and we’d be happy to do the best we can to address it.

Here’s the Nicene Creed we profess.

What We Believe

“Our profession of faith begins with God, for God is the First and the Last, the beginning and the end of everything. The Credo begins with God the Father, for the Father is the first divine person of the Most Holy Trinity; our Creed begins with the creation of heaven and earth, for creation is the beginning and the foundation of all God’s works.”

—the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 198

Catholic belief is succinctly expressed in the profession of faith or credo called the Nicene Creed:
The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

 

[Lucy107]

Oh good grief. I would faint if I heard a Catholic take all the credit for the Church and its truth.

Oh, don’t faint!

It seems to me that your experience with Catholics has been not good and at best
“bad” for lack of a better word. I am sorry for that. There is no such Catholic teaching that
we get credit for the work of the Holy Spirit.

Don’t be sorry.

People taking credit for God’s work - this really is not suprising, not at all. It seems to be the default of most people anyway, religious or not, Catholic or not. It’s commonly known as “pride.”

 

[MaryT777]

Oh, don’t faint!

Don’t be sorry.

People taking credit for God’s work - this really is not suprising, not at all. It seems to be the default of most people anyway, religious or not, Catholic or not. It’s commonly known as “pride.”

Well said and Amen. The ole’ sin of pride can hit us all. By the way I see you are in a trial membership, a late welcome to the forums. I’m happy to see your posts as well on other threads

Mary.

 

[Lucy107]

By the way I see you are in a trial membership, a late welcome to the forums. I’m happy to see your posts as well on other threads

Thank you.

People taking credit for God’s work - this really is not suprising, not at all. It seems to be the default of most people anyway, religious or not, Catholic or not. It’s commonly known as “pride.”

Of course, it makes for an explosive mixture when people teach on the topic of God, but mix that with their own pride, trying to take credit for God’s work in some way.

Someone who is spiritually a beginner can get really messed up listening to such a preacher.

Come to think of it, it seems it takes a kind of pride on one’s own part to be hurt or distracted by the pride of others, though.

A preacher could teach a doctrine on the topic of God, and in some way take credit for it (“I’m so humble/so advanced that I can hear God’s voice”), but it’s only if the listener has a similar pride that the listener will take seriously that part about the preacher being so humble/so advanced. Someone without that pride might not even notice those prideful parts of the preacher’s talk.

(This is not to say that nobody can ever hear the voice of God. It’s when they take credit for it that pride is at work.)

See, I told you it was a good idea to reflect on the solutions of the Protestant Reformators. roud:

 

[MaryT777]

Thank you.

Of course, it makes for an explosive mixture when people teach on the topic of God, but mix that with their own pride, trying to take credit for God’s work in some way.

Someone who is spiritually a beginner can get really messed up listening to such a preacher.

Come to think of it, it seems it takes a kind of pride on one’s own part to be hurt or distracted by the pride of others, though.

A preacher could teach a doctrine on the topic of God, and in some way take credit for it (“I’m so humble/so advanced that I can hear God’s voice”), but it’s only if the listener has a similar pride that the listener will take seriously that part about the preacher being so humble/so advanced. Someone without that pride might not even notice those prideful parts of the preacher’s talk.

(This is not to say that nobody can ever hear the voice of God. It’s when they take credit for it that pride is at work.)

See, I told you it was a good idea to reflect on the solutions of the Protestant Reformators. roud:

LOL…yes you did say as such.
Now it’s a good idea to also reflect on some of the solutions to the Protestant Reformation
found in the Catholic Church…
Couldn’t resist!~
Peace and Blessings,
Mary.

 

[TertiumQuid]

First of all, thanks for an interesting thread topic. The question you address is not unknown in Lutheran circles. In fact, Lutheran Professor Robert Jenson states the following:

“Luther was indeed one of ‘the Reformers,’ whose proposals triggered lasting schism in the Western church. Whether he would have pressed his convictions in quite the same way had he been able to look farther into the future, we cannot know. In any case, the aspects of Luther’s work over which the church divided – whatever they may in fact have been – have long since had their effect for good and ill.” Jenson, “Luther’s Contemporary Theological Significance”, in “Companion”, pg. 272-3

First of all, we see a Lutheran Professor stating that that it was Luther ‘whose proposals triggered lasting schism……”, which I think is quite an admission. It also brings out the point that it is acceptable, at least to Lutheran academics, to discuss Luther’s ‘role’ in the Western Schism.

I took a few minutes to look for this quote, and was pleasantly surprised to find the entire pdf of the book it was taken from. There’s nothing shocking to find a scholar or theologian from any Western church body admit that the Reformation caused division. Interesting to the context of the article from which this quote was taken is that the author’s purpose was to discuss Luther’s “contemporary theological significance.” In other words, the author goes on to discuss positive aspects of Luther’s theology the church can glean insight from…today.

From the same article, the author, Robert W. Jenson, was able to wonderfully articulate something that describes the way we do church history:

“Active participants in the continuing theological argument are inevitably and properly
cannibals of their predecessors. They dismember predecessors’ systems or structures of intuition, and use bits and pieces for their own purposes.”

We’re all guilty of this, for better or for worse. Some people are able to use those “bits and pieces” in a more fair and honest way than others. Some people take those “bits and pieces” and put them into their own theological worldview without at least trying to understand how they fit in the theological system in which they live to their fullest. Catholics do this Luther, Protestants do this with aspects of Catholic theology as well.

 

[JonNC]

But Jon, that’s why WE’RE here…to defend the Catholic Church from such attempts and, in so doing, to provide reasonable evidence to one and all that the Catholic Church is all that it claims to be.

So, keep those softballs coming!

And there are many times you do that, Randy - attempt to defend the Catholic Church by providing “reasonable evidence to one and all that the Catholic Church is all that it claims to be.” That means a presentation of the truths of the Catholic faith. Yes?
I would say that, by and large, that’s what I try to do (with varying levels of success) regarding the Lutheran tradition, not by hiding or denying our flaws as sinners, but more importantly, not by spending my entire time here seeking to expose the flaws of the sinners in the Catholic Church.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=Topper17;12735274]I find it interesting that you question my motives, which is what Luther would do in this situation. Actually my motives have been very well explained. It should also be noted that Luther always questioned the motives of his opponents as a means to tear down their credibility. One of my most recent posts included this fact. You did not comment on this Edwards quote, preferring to discuss a ‘different subject’ as usual.

I apologize if my intentions were unclear. I was not my intent to question your motives, but instead respond to your previously stated motives: You may choose to disagree Edwin, but given Luther’s treatment of his opponents,** “I don’t think Lutherans have a leg to stand on whatsoever in complaining about anybody’s ‘polemical style’ in their criticism of Luther. That seems to me to be extraordinarily hypocritical.”**

More comments about my motives. Luther would be proud.

Only a response to those you have previously stated.

Not to the thousands who come here with to search for the Truth, and ONLY the knowledge that they gained in their Protestant upbringings. Plus, if Lutherans have actually defeated this arguments at some point in the past all you would have to do is drag them out and post them. But there was no response then either.

Of all of the Lutheran and Catholic laity, ISTM that those who are here at CAF are likely rather informed about these issues.
What arguments are you presenting that Lutherans have to defeat? Luther was a sinner, and at times a rather obnoxious one. Why would we feel moved to defeat a known? The quotes you provide often come from Lutherans. Do you think we are arguing against ourselves regarding this?

Jon, this statement is false.

Not at all. You often refer to the website of a particular poster here as being anti-Catholic.
I’m merely saying the accusation of someone being anti-something rings hollow.

Jon

 

[Chong]

Jesus is God. He ushered in a New Covenant with miraculous signs and with a Sacrifice.

Luther was not God, and nor was he ushering in a new covenant.

Were it not for Luther and the other reformists we’d not be having such a discussion.
The reformation brought about a more Bible centered religious outlook.
Luther did not usher-in a new covenant, but an outlook that today has been accepted worldwide by an almost a billion people. Statistically, Catholics outnumber the protestants by a small margin, of about 0.5bn. Historically, the Catholic faith has been in existence for almost 2000 years, while protestantism is about 500 years old. Maybe, by 2050 the statistics will be very different.

 

[clem456]

Were it not for Luther and the other reformists we’d not be having such a discussion. The reformation brought about some freedoms of religious views.

Really? We’d not be having this discussion if not for Luther?
So then…let’s look at the implications.
Reform is always needed, but in this point of view Luther is indeed cast as God-like because according to this, without him Christianity could not have come to it’s present stage of fulfillment. This is an extremely narrow view of God’s saving action cemented in one person. It denies that God can act as he wills, through who he wills, when he wills, and imputes his saving power into a human being.

It also badly ignores the history of the Catholic Church. The Church, while not perfect, brought Christian culture and the Gospel itself to humanity. For 1500 years the Church had brought the light of Christ to the world. It strikes me as arrogant that God needed Luther to prove his Church’s durability.

Luther did not usher a new covenant, but a critique that today has been accepted worldwide by a people almost a billion. Statistically, Catholics outnumber the protestants by a small margin. Historically, the Catholic faith has been in existence for almost 2000 years, while protestantism is around 500 years.

And statistics make right?
It is good that large numbers of people come to know Christ.
Perhaps if Luther had critiqued, but not left the Church, there would be billions of people actually united in Christianity, instead of splintered into thousands of tiny self-assertive pieces.

Father I pray that they might be one…

It seems a healthy perspective is…well…healthy.

 

[MaryT777]

Were it not for Luther and the other reformists we’d not be having such a discussion.
The reformation brought about a more Bible centered religious outlook.
Luther did not usher-in a new covenant, but an outlook that today has been accepted worldwide by an almost a billion people. Statistically, Catholics outnumber the protestants by a small margin, of about 0.5bn. Historically, the Catholic faith has been in existence for almost 2000 years, while protestantism is about 500 years old. Maybe, by 2050 the statistics will be very different.

Luther also had a printing press which was of great help in assisting to print out Bibles so they were affordable.

The problem with this approach is that many here do not like to be called protestants and prefer to be grouped with their denomination, and the particular synods or belief system it encompasses. If you group religion groups that way, the Catholics “outnumber” the various Protestant religions quite a bit. That said I have never believed the size of a denom has anything to do with the truth of it. I see the Holy Spirit at work in leading all to truth in the Catholic Faith.

I personally believe as time goes by and denominations splinter further into subsects we will see more people drawn to the truth of the Catholic Church.

That said, I may be biased!~
Mary.

 

[onenow1]

Luther also had a printing press which was of great help in assisting to print out Bibles so they were affordable.

The problem with this approach is that many here do not like to be called protestants and prefer to be grouped with their denomination, and the particular synods or belief system it encompasses. If you group religion groups that way, the Catholics “outnumber” the various Protestant religions quite a bit. That said I have never believed the size of a denom has anything to do with the truth of it. I see the Holy Spirit at work in leading all to truth in the Catholic Faith.

I personally believe as time goes by and denominations splinter further into subsects we will see more people drawn to the truth of the Catholic Church.

That said, I may be biased!~
Mary.

Hi Mary, Saint Paul was certainly biased for the anointed one, Jesus Christ.

? I think this fits from Arius to Luther to today. Priests and Bishops.

Acts 20: 26, Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all of you,

27 for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.

28 Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son.

29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;

30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.

God Bless

 

[spina1953]

Then you hold an internally inconsistent position.
You’re saying that the Church is both flawed and perfect.

Hi Lucy 11107: I did not say that the CC is both flawed and perfect. The CC teaches truth that is has had since the time of the Apostles who learned it from Christ Himself. However, that being said, The CC is made up of flawed and sinful people since no one is perfect.

                          The Apostles were not perfect, nor were any of the disciples, nor anyone who came to believe in what the CC teaches. This does not mean that what the CC teaches is flawed or imperfect, as the truth never lies. Since the beginning the CC has always taught what had been passed on to it first from the Apostles who had received it from Jesus the Christ. While many came to believe, many also did not believe.

                           There has always been and I suspect there will always be those who for one reason or another deny the truth of what the CC teaches. There is no doubt in my mind that there were and will be those within the CC who will commit sins as all people do but some will sin  and will be tossed out because they are held to a higher standard than the rest of us, because we are in their care and they are not being what they claim to be.

                           This does not mean that the CC itself is wrong or that it teaches non truths but only that those who are to guide us to God through Christ Jesus are not doing their job. Bad Pope, Bishops and priests I think will always be with us but that does not take us from the truth that the CC teaches, it just means that evil is always at work in trying to tear down what Christ Himself founded on the Rock of Peter.

 

[benhur]

Now we’re talking about “his” reward? Do you mean you are now concerned about Topper’s “reward” or salvation in some sense? Whoa. I don’t claim to be God.

Mary.

Sorry. Maybe I misunderstood your post #577. Maybe it was tongue in cheek or you are bizarred at others criticizing the criticizer.

 

[benhur]

Too bad someone never told Luther that during the reformation.
Mary.

???

 

[benhur]

Here’s the Nicene Creed we profess.

What We Believe

“Our profession of faith begins with God, for God is the First and the Last, the beginning and the end of everything. The Credo begins with God the Father, for the Father is the first divine person of the Most Holy Trinity; our Creed begins with the creation of heaven and earth, for creation is the beginning and the foundation of all God’s works.”

—the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 198

Catholic belief is succinctly expressed in the profession of faith or credo called the Nicene Creed:
The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Cool. Quite catholic/universal to Orthodox and Protestants. and Catholics

Now we all have “confessions”, and creeds, and canons, galore. And still pushing for more.

The beautiful, early church creed only separated Gnostics and Arians from Christians.

The new ones separate Christians form Christians.

Takes two to tango, even too split, especially when you don’t “pacify those that contend”, as the Didache suggests.

What does that say about the supposed strength and quality of ''Unity" when a crazed, megalomaniac, scatologically bent etc., etc.monk trips everything up?

Thank goodness it all his fault and not any of our own.?.?

 

[Denise1957]

I would say that, by and large, that’s what I try to do (with varying levels of success) regarding the Lutheran tradition, not by hiding or denying our flaws as sinners, but more importantly, not by spending my entire time here seeking to expose the flaws of the sinners in the Catholic Church.

Jon

By stating that you do not spend your entire time here exposing the flaws of sinners in the Catholic Church, you seem to be speaking about sinners in general. But since this thread is about the Reformation, it would seem appropriate to talk about the person who was largely responsible for it.

 

[MaryT777]

Hi Mary, Saint Paul was certainly biased for the anointed one, Jesus Christ.

? I think this fits from Arius to Luther to today. Priests and Bishops.

Acts 20: 26, Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all of you,

27 for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.

28 Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son.

29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;

30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.

God Bless

Yes, well said. We can certainly agree on that point:
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (free online via google search)

“Christ is the Head of this Body”

792 Christ "is the head of the body, the Church."225 He is the principle of creation and redemption. Raised to the Father’s glory, "in everything he [is] preeminent,"226 especially in the Church, through whom he extends his reign over all things.

 

[benhur]

Yes, well said. We can certainly agree on that point:
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (free online via google search)

“Christ is the Head of this Body”

792 Christ "is the head of the body, the Church."225 He is the principle of creation and redemption. Raised to the Father’s glory, "in everything he [is] preeminent,"226 especially in the Church, through whom he extends his reign over all things.

Amen. And as per lumen gentia 2nd Vat I would not have come to know that , even know Him, but thru “another” “reformed” catholic church, notwithstanding the Catholic Church taking credit for those and my good graces also.