Peter the Rock

[guanophore]

guan,
How active was Orthodoxy in central Europe at the time? While the contacts by the Tubingen Lutherans met with rebuke from Orthodoxy, there’s no reason to believe that any other outcome might have been possible.

Jon

You are right, of course. Luther probably had more exposure to the Eastern Church than all the other reformers put together, but there was very little awareness outside of Europe of any of the expressions of the ancient faith in Africa, Arabia, or the Orient.

Orthodoxy, along with Catholicism, requires obedience to Apostolic Authority. They probably were not impressed with Luther’s writings or attitude, either. As much as Pope Leo deserved such epithets, they would find their own Bishops above such polemics.

 

[jpaul1953]

Actually I think Jerome was translating Greek into Latin. However, I agree that, if the Reformers had the original Aramaic of Matthew that exists in some ancient Syriac texts things might have been different. But the reframing of the meaning of Peter the Rock at the Reformation was only a small pebble of the avalanche of rebellion. Most importantly, the Reformers wanted to get rid of the corrupted clergy that were in Europe at that time. I am not sure that any of them thought much about Catholicism in other areas of the world. If it was just about Peter’s role, why didn’t they all become Orthodox?

Dear Guanopore,

I understand the complexity of the issue, but if the corrupt clergy, which had nothing to do with the most devout Catholic parishioners that lived throughout the lands who followed the laws of the Church, were protected by the true authoritative voice of the Holy Mother Church, they would of had to follow protocol to rid the true church of its disease (Wow…long sentence here…sorry) and not just take it upon themselves to split from Holy Mother Church.

I believe the authority could not have been questioned if it wasn’t in question.

Respectfully

Jpaul1953

PS: greek/latin are quite similar but i will check on that. And yes the language off the Church was Latin

 

[manualman]

From the Lutheran Confessions, the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope.
…

Jon,

For Luther’s logic to be correct, one would expect that the NT would refer to this apostle as “Simon the Peter.” But it doesn’t. From that passage forward, Simon is no longer Simon. Peter isn’t just the description of his faith, it is what he IS. Which is why that is what he is called. Sometimes things really are as simple as they seem.

 

[manualman]

… But the reframing of the meaning of Peter the Rock at the Reformation was only a small pebble of the avalanche of rebellion. Most importantly, the Reformers wanted to get rid of the corrupted clergy that were in Europe at that time.

I agree that this issue would not have made a difference. But even the corruption of the clergy was not the major driving force of the ‘reformation.’ Actually the reality of the situation is much nastier.

Religious innovators pop up here and there all the time. Whether or not they gain a critical mass of following depends on a large number of factors. Hillaire Belloc makes a convincing case (“How the Reformation Happened”) that Luther and Calvin would have been anonymous in history had their radical ideas not been noticed by the rich and powerful of their day. They were embraced, supported and propped up precisely because their novel ideas allowed local “nobles” to seize the relative wealth of the monasteries, convents and dioceses for their own selfish purposes. They used the reformers like useful idiots for monetary gain and little more.

This is not to impugn the motives of the early protestants themselves who seemed to be genuinely interested in what they thought was the truth. But those “nobles” that gave them a public voice, were mostly merely drunk with visions of greed and power lust. A sadly common situation in human history.