Luther Did Not Start the Reformation

[tgGodsway]

No… I’m not sure who you are referring to here, but perhaps Luther. Luther didn’t leave his Church to start another. Luther was one stone in a universal Church body who tried to make change among his peers, but it all fell on deaf ears at the time, so he took his one stone and made reform. But as it turned out, Luther was not alone. Many people around the world joined in the reform with their one stone to build a spiritual building of God.

Yes there is one shepherd, (Christ) and one flock. That one flock includes the CC, but is not limited to the CC.

Division comes when one group postures themselves over the others and forces them to yield their devotion to them. This was never what the founding Apostles intended.

 

[Gorgias]

No… I’m not sure who you are referring to here, but perhaps Luther.

No, I’m talking about you. Right now, you believe in what your Church teaches, and you believe that this belief is God-breathed and binding on your soul.

But… if something happens that you don’t like (i.e., if you don’t like ‘reforms’ that happen in your church, or perhaps you dislike that certain reforms didn’t take place), then is it ok to leave your church – which you now believe speaks God’s word to you – and start up a new one?

Luther didn’t leave his Church to start another. Luther was one stone in a universal Church body who tried to make change among his peers, but it all fell on deaf ears at the time, so he took his one stone and made reform.

No… he didn’t reform, so much as he left one and was instrumental in starting another.

But as it turned out, Luther was not alone. Many people around the world joined in the reform with their one stone to build a spiritual building of God.

Actually, right from the very beginning, they picked up their stone and went off and built their own edifice. They learned the lesson of their mentor more fully than he could have ever hoped. (And he was very distraught that they did; he wanted them to see it his way, and wasn’t thrilled when they chose a different way.)

Division comes when one group postures themselves over the others and forces them to yield their devotion to them. This was never what the founding Apostles intended.

“I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by [the] grace [of Christ] for a different gospel (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!” (Galatians 1:6-9)

“just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. Thus we know this is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.” (1 John 2:18-19)

Actually, ‘reform movements’ that created new congregations were around since the earliest days of the Church… and no, the founding Apostles did not accept that this fracturing of the Body of Christ is what Jesus intended.

 

[tgGodsway]

But… if something happens that you don’t like (i.e., if you don’t like ‘reforms’ that happen in your church, or perhaps you dislike that certain reforms didn’t take place), then is it ok to leave your church – which you now believe speaks God’s word to you – and start up a new one?

Well, this would depend on what is at stake. If the Church wants to change the color of the carpet, or go from a 40 watt light bulb to a 60 watt, and everyone seems to be upset about it, I guess I could weather the storm. IoI

No!.. if my Church decided that the N.T. was just one of many sources of divine revelation, I would fight (theologically) until they throw me out.
If my Church decided that Mary the mother of Jesus had no sin, I would fight (theologically) until they throw me out.

Jesus would preach in the synagogues and the people would get stirred up and throw him out, as in the case of Luke 4:16 where they threw him out of the town. Luther had a great mentor.

Unity for the sake of unity is not enough. Jesus said, I did not come to “give peace on the earth” but rather division. Lu. 12:51

The gospel unifies to those who yield to it. But it also divides for those ensnared by pride who want to lord it over the rest of us.

Luther desired reform for the CC. But they could not conceive of such a notion that THEY needed reform. This is the attitude on this site all day long.

 

[tgGodsway]

I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by [the] grace [of Christ] for a different gospel (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!” (Galatians 1:6-9)

yes! what’s the context here Gorgias, or does it matter? The context was that these Galatians were returning to the obedience of the Law as a means of justification. I have preached grace in a way that shocks you because you are so derailed from it. Yet you quote this verse?

 

[tgGodsway]

just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. Thus we know this is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.” (1 John 2:18-19)

again, what is the context here, or does it really matter?.. these were men denying the divinity of Christ. I never have. I only pronounce His divinity. Again,… just derailed talk.

 

[tgGodsway]

Actually, ‘reform movements’ that created new congregations were around since the earliest days of the Church… and no, the founding Apostles did not accept that this fracturing of the Body of Christ is what Jesus intended.

The first century Church had multiple Churches and spreading fast, to which Paul and/or the other apostles did not micromanage. They laid down the foundation and it was up to each local body to build on it. And by the way, all of them had one chief Shepard, Christ Jesus Himself.

And another by the way, Jesus Himself was the “Luther” of His day. He came to navigate His ship back on to her course, but they wouldn’t listen. No, … He was the greatest reformer ever.

Prior to His reform, His side kick, John the Baptist, held worship services outside the influence of the Pharisees and began to re-gather God’s people. So when Jesus came on the scene, reform was birthed.

 

[theCardinalbird]

If my Church decided that Mary the mother of Jesus had no sin, I would fight (theologically) until they throw me out.

But isn’t that the Catholic Church?

 

[tgGodsway]

No, Joe1 this statement is coming from a dialog between me and Gorgias. He asked me about my own Church today, what would it take for me to leave.

 

[theCardinalbird]

No i mean doesn’t the Catholic Church say that Mary was without sin?

 

[tgGodsway]

Yes, If you are Catholic you know this. They say she was conceived in a miracle of grace without original sin. She lived sinless all the days of her life, and went to heaven to sit at the right hand of Jesus making intercession for us, as a sinless queen of heaven.

 

[theCardinalbird]

Yes, If you are Catholic you know this. They say she was conceived in a miracle of grace without original sin. She lives sinless all the days of her life, and she went to heaven and sits at the right hand of Jesus making intercession for us, as a sinless queen of heaven.

Yes, i know most of it. what i wanted to know (and i guess i should have made it clear) is do you believe this?

 

[tgGodsway]

I believe only what God’s word says about her and nothing more.

 

[theCardinalbird]

I believe only what God’s word says about her and nothing more.

ok. then i guess you are in agreement with the Church

 

[tgGodsway]

okay great.

 

[guanophore]

Division comes when one group postures themselves over the others and forces them to yield their devotion to them. This was never what the founding Apostles intended.

This is not what the Apostles intended, but neither is it what the Catholic Church does. The CC does not “force” anyone and the CC does not ask for “devotion”. The CC calls us all to devote ourselves to Christ, and to the Apsotles’ teaching.

“I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by [the] grace [of Christ] for a different gospel (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!” (Galatians 1:6-9)

The reason Catholics cannot accept the Reformed doctrines, @tgGodsway, is that they constitute a different Gospel than the one we received from the Apostles.

 

[tgGodsway]

This is not what the Apostles intended, but neither is it what the Catholic Church does. The CC does not “force” anyone and the CC does not ask for “devotion”. The CC calls us all to devote ourselves to Christ, and to the Apsotles’ teaching.

Well then, there shouldn’t be any problem with us “separated brethren.” We too embrace the teachings of the Apostles. But you left something out here. You do not just embrace the teachings of the apostles. You embrace this mysterious thing called sacred tradition, which is believed to be an infallible tradition. This in of itself is contrary to the word of God.

Okay… I’ve got to go for now guanophore. No hard feelings my brother, even if you see me as a separated brother.

I’m taking my wife on a date.
Blessings

 

[guanophore]

Well then, there shouldn’t be any problem with us “separated brethren.”

I don’t think that one can draw this conclusion from what I have said. The fact that no one is requesting or requiring you to have “devotion” to the CC does not equate to there being “no problem”.

We too embrace the teachings of the Apostles.

Some of them, certainly, but in other areas, doctrines created at the Reformation have been embraced, so extensively as to create a “different Gospel” than the one we have received.

The gospel unifies to those who yield to it. But it also divides for those ensnared by pride who want to lord it over the rest of us.

Often you make these statements that seem to indicate you have an authority problem. It is almost as if, at some point in your life, you were deeply wounded by someone who abused their power over you.
As if someone who was prideful “lorded it over” you causing a lot of pain and anguish.

Luther desired reform for the CC. But they could not conceive of such a notion that THEY needed reform. This is the attitude on this site all day long.

I do agree that the people in authority at the time of Luther were prideful and not open to reform, but you are talking about apples and lizards here! People are ALWAYS in need of reform! The doctrine of Christ, however, was not, and is not. This is the infallible part of the Church. Where the Reformers created problems (for themselves and the Body of Christ) was inventing new doctrines.

I have preached grace in a way that shocks you because you are so derailed from it.

Silly tgG. Is that why you are here at CAF? to “preach grace”? I think you have forgotten that the New Testament is a Catholic book! It was written by, for, and about Catholics. There is nothing in it that is not Catholic!

again, what is the context here, or does it really matter?

Yes, it matters. Those that left from under the Apostolic authority and went forth, preaching theri own ideas that were contrary to what the Apostles taught, are working against Christ. They are “antichrist”. If they were really of the Apostolic fold, they would have remained there.

The first century Church had multiple Churches and spreading fast, to which Paul and/or the other apostles did not micromanage.

There was (as there is now) ONE CHURCH. The Church throughout all (Catholic). I am not sure how you define “micromanage”, but the Apostles appointed Bishops to manage the Church. They trained the Bishops to exercise complete authority, and instructed them to allow no one to disobey them.

 

[guanophore]

They laid down the foundation and it was up to each local body to build on it.

Yes, but in each of those local bodies there were elders, and overseers. The Church was never intended to be “democratic”, tgG. This is a model that infected the church through American civil development. The Church has always been a monarchy.

And by the way, all of them had one chief Shepard, Christ Jesus Himself.

No one has disputed this either. The charge given to Peter to feed and care for the flock of God does not somehow “replace” Jesus as the chief Shepherd.

Prior to His reform, His side kick, John the Baptist, held worship services outside the influence of the Pharisees and began to re-gather God’s people.

I must tell you that referring to John the Baptist as Jesus “side kick” is grossly disrespectful.nnI suppose you want him to kiss your ring as well?

“I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John” Luke 7:28

ok. then i guess you are in agreement with the Church

You have misunderstood. He is saying that if his current Presbyterian Church embraced what the Catholic Church teaches about Mary, he would argue with them until they kicked him out, at which time he would presumably find another ecclesial community that had beliefs more conformed to his own.

 

[theCardinalbird]

You have misunderstood. He is saying that if his current Presbyterian Church embraced what the Catholic Church teaches about Mary, he would argue with them until they kicked him out, at which time he would presumably find another ecclesial community that had beliefs more conformed to his own.

Oh…well then I guess there is no agreement. Mary was sinless

 

[Gorgias]

Well, this would depend on what is at stake. If the Church wants to change the color of the carpet, or go from a 40 watt light bulb to a 60 watt, and everyone seems to be upset about it, I guess I could weather the storm. IoI

Well, yeah, but those are trivial things. If you left your church for one of those things, I’d question your commitment to that church and its beliefs. So… ok.

No!.. if my Church decided that the N.T. was just one of many sources of divine revelation, I would fight (theologically) until they throw me out.

If my Church decided that Mary the mother of Jesus had no sin, I would fight (theologically) until they throw me out.

OK, but hold on a second: what you’re describing is a sudden change in doctrine. That’s not what Luther was facing. There was settled doctrine, and he was good with it, and suddenly, because of an abuse in a practice – much like your 60 watt bulb! – he not only advocates for changing the practice, but he decides that doctrine is at fault, too!

So… the appropriate example wouldn’t be that your church decides that Mary had no sin, but rather that you decided she had no sin, and started demanding that your church change their doctrines to fit your new ideas. Is that reasonable?

Jesus would preach in the synagogues and the people would get stirred up and throw him out, as in the case of Luke 4:16 where they threw him out of the town. Luther had a great mentor.

Apples and oranges. They didn’t expel Him from the faith, and He didn’t abandon His co-religionists. (Moreover, He is God, so it’s not just “apples and oranges”, it’s a completely different case!)

Unity for the sake of unity is not enough.

Disunity for the sake of “I don’t want to listen to you” isn’t enough either, which is what my citations were demonstrating.

The gospel unifies to those who yield to it. But it also divides for those ensnared by pride who want to lord it over the rest of us.

Did Luther yield to the Gospel? Or did he re-create one of his own liking?

Luther desired reform for the CC. But they could not conceive of such a notion that THEY needed reform.

Do you remember what Jesus said about those who sit on the chair of Moses? Do what they say. Did Luther do what those who sat in authority in Jesus’ Church said?

This is the attitude on this site all day long.

Let’s be fair: there’s pride on both sides of the split.