Opinions on the Reformation

[gtrenewed]

I dont mean this offensively but, Jesus started our church everything else was man made. That to me is pretty cut and dry. The C.C. in itself never promoted indulginces, men did. You want to lump the entire C.C. at that time as doing these things. This was 1500 years after she started. The church was massive, not all were corrupt.

What was the Scriptural basis for indulgences and for the sale of indulgences?

The RCC, don’t forget the R for Roman otherwise other catholics will be offended, is made up of people. To say the RCC in itself never promoted indulgences is not possible for it was at the highest level that it was done by people. The one’s that were not corrupt should have forced the issue more diligently. Oh, wait, that’s right, they did and one was burned at the stake and another 100 years later narrowly missed execution.

Any person who is in Jesus has the first century church as their ancestor. That is pretty cut and dry in Scripture as well. What evolved into the RCC centuries after is another story. Tracing RCC heritage by paper lineage ignores the fact that we are all new creations in Christ behold the old things pass away. You can claim that you are part of Jesus’ church if you are in Jesus and so can I. The RCC may have a paper trail but I have the assurance of the Word of God.

 

[kempo1]

.

The point is the reformation came about due to unrepentent leaders.

.

Wrong. Scripture tells us that he was picked to fulfill Scripture. Judas was a sign to the Jews from the OT. It was one of the proofs that Jesus was the Messiah.
The examples you talk of are found in the various letters of the NT including Acts.

The church, people of faith in Jesus, have prevailed. When unrepentent corrupt leaders would not bend, believers carried on in Jesus as the Word.

 

[gtrenewed]

The whole basis of the Mass is Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. Jesus Christ is the whole focus!!!

Agreed

The C.C. was headed for correction regardless. The Holy Spirit would have made sure of it, and it did.

The Holy Spirit did make sure of it. If leadership does not change for a century and kills the ones calling for reform, would you stick around? Isn’t that how our country came into being? The message was finally understood because of the split.

Every tradition within the Church follows scripture. If it didnt, dont you think it would have fallen apart by now.

The sale of Indulgences, a tradition of that time that was unscriptural, did fall apart but at a great price.

You dont always know what is in the heart of an individual

Scripture says that out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. If out of the mouths of leadership comes words of unrepentence then they knew what was in their heart on that matter. There was no alternative for men of conscience at that time but to start their own congregations for they were excommunicated and their lives threatened. In a perfect world we would all continue to work for reform from within, but in light of what they were facing, and understanding that salvation is in Jesus and not in the RCC solely, they started their own congregations.

 

[aspirant]

What was the Scriptural basis for indulgences

A Primer on Indulgences.

and for the sale of indulgences?

Myths About Indulgences.

To say the RCC in itself never promoted indulgences is not possible

on Indulgences.Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

[Roblox84]

Never said judas was a leader but none the less he was one of the twelve. Now why would Jesus select that man knowing what he was about, never taking away his free will. He was to be an example to us all that these kinds of perpetrators would always find their way in to the church. My friend Jesus never spoke of his church being separated by a reformation. Instead he said the gates of hell would never prevail agaonst her. Did he lie when he spoke these words? No of course not and if you are one of these sola scripture believers then you should believe the words of Christ. If the church was to be torn apart as you claim it should be, then our faith is in vain because Jesus told a tale. You claim to be just another congregation, so i must assume you believe yourself to be a new form of Catholic, sorry just doesnt work. Jesus created his church through the apostles, the Holy Catholic Church. True you are our separated bretheren and i pray one day you find yourself back home in Chrsts original church

Yeah that’s what I have a hard time with is that in the bible it doesn’t state anywhere that the church would be torn apart into different beliefs, and a lot of those beliefs may not even be in Christ only a belief to prove other churches wrong.

 

[gtrenewed]

Charitable! you tell me that i cant tell the difference between the church and Jesus.

I’m sorry but I said “if”. The reason I put it that way is because when I was raised in the RCC, old time pre-vatII Baltimore catechism RCC, I was taught about following the RCC and its rituals. As an altar boy, I suffered punishment for not getting it right in repeating the Latin responses or doing something out of order. I understood getting to heaven, or at least purgatory, as being a good person and following the RCC rules. I didn’t know Jesus.

During my time, in my parish, private Scripture reading was not encouraged, it was discouraged. It was enough that we heard it at Mass. When I finally got hold of the Scriptures, I found my faith, I found Jesus. This may not be your experience but it was mine. I felt I was drifting in the RCC way; so, I turned to the Scriptures to find an anchor. I found it in God’s Word. I can appreciate Mass now but I cannot agree that the RCC is the only true group of believers (church) on earth today. To be considered RC, the RCC says I must, so where does that leave me? Kind of in the same place as the reformers.

Well that being said i will move on to elsewhere my temper may be getting the best of me, God Bless and Good Night!!

I am not certain why you are so angry? I do not regret my words except that I wasn’t clear on saying “if” but I regret that we cannot communicate charitably.
P.S. A slamming door would have been a better icon to leave with than a smily face!

 

[gtrenewed]

Yeah that’s what I have a hard time with is that in the bible it doesn’t state anywhere that the church would be torn apart into different beliefs, and a lot of those beliefs may not even be in Christ only a belief to prove other churches wrong.

I am not certain why it is important to you to find the reformation in the Bible?

Scripture leads us to eternal life in Jesus Christ. Those who believe are members of His Body. His Body is His Church.

I don’t know of any church founded solely to prove another church wrong. Members of congregations may have differences and split but it is not to prove the other wrong, it is to worship in a way they believe is Scriptural.

The RCC does thing as they believe and have a paper trail to the first century. Others that believe in Jesus do things as they believe Scripture teaches and have the first century church as their ancestor. Any Believer is part of the Body and part of His Church.

 

[Roblox84]

I’m sorry but I said “if”. The reason I put it that way is because when I was raised in the RCC, old time pre-vatII Baltimore catechism RCC, I was taught about following the RCC and its rituals. As an altar boy, I suffered punishment for not getting it right in repeating the Latin responses or doing something out of order. I understood getting to heaven, or at least purgatory, as being a good person and following the RCC rules. I didn’t know Jesus.

During my time, in my parish, private Scripture reading was not encouraged, it was discouraged. It was enough that we heard it at Mass. When I finally got hold of the Scriptures, I found my faith, I found Jesus. This may not be your experience but it was mine. I felt I was drifting in the RCC way; so, I turned to the Scriptures to find an anchor. I found it in God’s Word. I can appreciate Mass now but I cannot agree that the RCC is the only true group of believers (church) on earth today. To be considered RC, the RCC says I must, so where does that leave me? Kind of in the same place as the reformers.

That sounds similar to my experience. The Catholic mass greatly varies around the world and when I used to attend mass in Poland for a few years that I lived there, the priests would never read anything from the Bible. Because of this, most of the people in the country didn’t own and didn’t know what the bible said or meant. I guess mass was based only around the Eucharist and nothing else. I really didn’t experience any downfall to this myself because I was just a teen and I wasn’t a very religious person. But I can see why a lot of people would rather depend on the bible rather then depend on the Church to teach it.

 

[Roblox84]

I am not certain why it is important to you to find the reformation in the Bible?

Scripture leads us to eternal life in Jesus Christ. Those who believe are members of His Body. His Body is His Church.

I don’t know of any church founded solely to prove another church wrong. Members of congregations may have differences and split but it is not to prove the other wrong, it is to worship in a way they believe is Scriptural.

The RCC does thing as they believe and have a paper trail to the first century. Others that believe in Jesus do things as they believe Scripture teaches and have the first century church as their ancestor. Any Believer is part of the Body and part of His Church.

I just had a few experiences with pastors preaching about the doctrines of other churches or of a faith of an entire people, that’s all.

 

[rinnie]

For the sake of discussion, let’s say the Church is an institution, and not the communion of saints.
Even if we take western non-catholics out of the equation for a moment, which is the original Church? Rome? According to the early councils, the Bishop of Rome’s jurisdiction is of the West.

Why should we accept that the other patriarchates are not the original Church and Rome is?

Jon

On the other hand why can’t we?

 

[rinnie]

I’m sorry but I said “if”. The reason I put it that way is because when I was raised in the RCC, old time pre-vatII Baltimore catechism RCC, I was taught about following the RCC and its rituals. As an altar boy, I suffered punishment for not getting it right in repeating the Latin responses or doing something out of order. I understood getting to heaven, or at least purgatory, as being a good person and following the RCC rules. I didn’t know Jesus.

During my time, in my parish, private Scripture reading was not encouraged, it was discouraged. It was enough that we heard it at Mass. When I finally got hold of the Scriptures, I found my faith, I found Jesus. This may not be your experience but it was mine. I felt I was drifting in the RCC way; so, I turned to the Scriptures to find an anchor. I found it in God’s Word. I can appreciate Mass now but I cannot agree that the RCC is the only true group of believers (church) on earth today. To be considered RC, the RCC says I must, so where does that leave me? Kind of in the same place as the reformers.

I don’t recall thought the Church teaching the RCC is the only true Church. I thought as long as they are all in communion with Rome and have all of the valid Sacraments we were all in communion with eachother?

 

[JonNC]

On the other hand why can’t we?

Hi rinnie. Hope you are well.
Well, of course we can. I guess I should of said what evidence is there that makes either choice the one true institutional Church. I take from what meager knowledge I have of the early Church, that the patriarchates were equal.
Even if I were to decide to move to a Church that is in apostolic succession, there is still the chance that I have not found the one true Church.

Jon

 

[Sword_Brethren]

Anyone can open a Bible today and discover what beliefs are needed to be a member of Jesus’ Church and find salvation.

Like David Koresh, Jim Baker, and Jim Jones?

 

[Palaeologos]

The “Catholic Belief System” had been added to so it was no longer recognized as the original,

Anyone can open a Bible today and discover what beliefs are needed to be a member of Jesus’ Church and find salvation.

If that’s true, then why do so many “Bible-only” churches disagree with each other?

 

[Sword_Brethren]

. It is not fear of the RCC but truth is found in Jesus and if I have the truth of Jesus outside of the RCC, why do I need to belong to it unless I am attracted to it?

.

Because Our Lord founded it. You don’t have all the truth, just part of it. All the truth resides only in the Holy Catholic Church.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

The unrepentent corruption caused a split so that Christianity could go on. .

No corruption did not cause the split. The pride of priests like Wycliffe, Hus, Luther, Knox, Muntzer, caused the split.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

If the poor had the Scriptures, they could have challenged also.
t.

 

[Palaeologos]

gtrenewed;6375033:

For the most part of Western History most people could not read.

Quite so. The idea that salvation is dependent upon the attainment of literacy has always puzzled me.

 

[aspirant]

Anyone can open a Bible today and discover what beliefs are needed to be a member of Jesus’ Church and find salvation.

Excellent examples.

For the most part of Western History the majority of people could not read.

And this is due in large part, of course, to the fact that books were both extremely rare and insanely expensive prior to the invention of movable type printing by Johannes Gutenburg.

Before movable type printing, most writings had to be hand copied-- a very time-consuming process. The average person could not afford both the time and materials to hand copy individual books of the Bible, much less the whole Bible, nor could the average person afford to pay another person for the time and materials necessary to hand copy. In such circumstances, it was simply not practical for most people to learn to read, nor was it necessary.

This is one of the reasons that the lectionary of readings and sacred art were so precious to the average person: they could hear and see what they could not read.

Even after the invention of movable type, books were still expensive. There’s a famous quote by Erasmus: “When I get a little money I buy books. If any is left I buy food and clothes.” These days, when books are so cheap, people think this quote is funny. They think of Erasmus as someone with his priorities way out of whack. But in Erasmus’ day, books really were a dear luxury that might prevent one from buying food and clothes.

 

[GKC]

Excellent examples.

And this is due in large part, of course, to the fact that books were both extremely rare and insanely expensive prior to the invention of movable type printing by Johannes Gutenburg.

Before movable type printing, most writings had to be hand copied-- a very time-consuming process. The average person could not afford both the time and materials to hand copy individual books of the Bible, much less the whole Bible, nor could the average person afford to pay another person for the time and materials necessary to hand copy. In such circumstances, it was simply not practical for most people to learn to read, nor was it necessary.

This is one of the reasons that the lectionary of readings and sacred art were so precious to the average person: they could hear and see what they could not read.

Even after the invention of movable type, books were still expensive. There’s a famous quote by Erasmus: “When I get a little money I buy books. If any is left I buy food and clothes.” These days, when books are so cheap, people think this quote is funny. They think of Erasmus as someone with his priorities way out of whack. But in Erasmus’ day, books really were a dear luxury that might prevent one from buying food and clothes.

I have Erasmus’ saying, done in calligraphy and framed, hanging on the wall. Expresses my attitude, for 55 years.

GKC