Questions about the Reformation

[glendab]

Hello RyanBlack.

I don’t agree with denigrating the faith traditions of students, and I don’t agree with presenting history in an unbalanced and inaccurate manner. However, I’m a public high school world history teacher, and I teach some of the more important theological issues. You simply can’t do justice to the Reformation by dealing only with socio-political aspects. Furthermore, state-mandated curricula sometimes actually require you to teach the religious issues. For example, in Virginia, where Old Dominion lives, the state standards state:

The student will demonstrate knowledge of the Reformation in terms of its impact on Western civilization by
a) explaining the effects of the theological, political, and economic differences that emerged, including the views and actions of Martin Luther, John Calvin, Henry VIII, and Elizabeth I;
b) describing the impact of religious conflicts, the Inquisition, and the Catholic Reformation on society and government actions;
c) describing changing cultural values, traditions, and philosophies, and assessing the role of the printing press.

In Texas, our standards call for us to teach the basic beliefs of several religious traditions. Even if I didn’t want to teach about religion in my class (which is not the case, it’s actually a subject matter where my students consistently show a high level of interest and engagement), there’s no way around it without jeopardizing my job, as we are not infrequently reminded that the curriculum is nonnegotiable.

I am going to quote this post over at another thread here at CAF. Right now, I am in discussion with a Catholic about the removal of Christian books from a public school library and the subsequent legal actions taken by the Pacific Justice Institute against these actions. The problem is the person I am discussing this with thinks the removal or all religious material from the libraries in all public schools is a good thing and has just said if we allow the Bible to be there, we have to allow the Santanic Bible to be there as well. His/her solution is NO RELIGIOUS MATERIAL AT ALL. And he or she is Catholic! Yikes!

I’m providing a link to the thread and hope you join us. It is titled “Report: School Accused of Purging Christian Books.” and is located on the Back Fence Forum.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=12370206#post12370206

Glenda

 

[glendab]

Hello OD.

Thanks again for your answers everyone.

I don’t think he should be teaching theology, I was just thinking he could say something like, “catholic and protestants also disagree theologically. They have different bibles, and views of purgatory and things like that. It wasnt just a political split”. Just so people know its more complicated, and it aint black and white.

We have only been on the reformation for one day, so I feel its fair to give him a second day at least, to expand on his previous points. However, I don’t think it will be good. What I am worried about are the test and the quizzes we have each class. One study question is, " List 3 reason the Catholic Church was corrupt." What if one doesn’t believe they were?

List three reasons: 1. Because the teacher of this course says it was. 2. Because Judas Iscariot was at the Last Supper at the Institution of the Eucharist and was a traitor. 3. Because Joan of Arc was burned at the stake for heresy.

There ya go. Next quiz question.

Glenda

 

[cryptoCalvinist]

1.What is an indulgence? Is it a, quote, “get out of purgatory free card”?
2. Did the Church abuse indulgences in the 1500’s?
3. Did Luther make any valid arguments in the 95 theses?
4. Did abuse of indulgences justify a reformation?
5. Did the Pope take “money from the poor, when he was rich.”?
6. Was the Church “corrupt.”?
7. Were priests in it for the money?
8. What about pluralism?

1.Yes, although that’s putting it in rather nasty language
2.Parts of the church, yes, but other parts tried to combat the abuse
3.Yes, including several the modern Roman Catholic Church accepts
4.If you are Catholic, the answer is probably no. If you are Protestant, the answer is probably yes.
5.He took small amounts of money from the poor, as any church does
6.Yes
7.Some were, most weren’t
8.Nobody believes in pluralism - those who claim they do, want to turn your religion into modernism through propaganda or government force

 

[spina1953]

1.Yes, although that’s putting it in rather nasty language
2.Parts of the church, yes, but other parts tried to combat the abuse
3.Yes, including several the modern Roman Catholic Church accepts
4.If you are Catholic, the answer is probably no. If you are Protestant, the answer is probably yes.
5.He took small amounts of money from the poor, as any church does
6.Yes
7.Some were, most weren’t
8.Nobody believes in pluralism - those who claim they do, want to turn your religion into modernism through propaganda or government force

I would like to answer your questions if I may. 1 An indulgence is not by any means a get out of purgatory card it only lessen the time as we call it one might spend there. 2 of course there were those who abused the real intention of how indulgences were to be used, but it was not the Church but individuals who did 3 the CC reformed those things that needed to be done but it was not just because Luther said that they needed to be reformed.4 Indulgences were really not the main reason for the reformation but who had the authority to interpret Scripture; the CC or the individual.5 The monies he received from indulgences were used to build St. Peter’s because the old one was in a state of needed repair.6 the CC itself was not corrupt but there were of course those in the CC who were corrupt . yes ther was some pluralism, but they were not accepted as having the same teachings that the CC used, they were really a sort of heretics, which the CC tried to root out.

 

[Della]

1.Yes, although that’s putting it in rather nasty language
2.Parts of the church, yes, but other parts tried to combat the abuse
3.Yes, including several the modern Roman Catholic Church accepts
4.If you are Catholic, the answer is probably no. If you are Protestant, the answer is probably yes.
5.He took small amounts of money from the poor, as any church does
6.Was the Church corrupt? Yes
7.Some were, most weren’t
8.Nobody believes in pluralism - those who claim they do, want to turn your religion into modernism through propaganda or government force

#6. No, the Church was not corrupt. As Christ’s body she can never be corrupt because of her divine nature. However, since she is both human and divine, as is her divine Head, and her human nature has not yet been fully sanctified, members of the body can be corrupt–although not usually totally corrupt, but like all sinners corrupt in some things while faithful in others. To make a blanket statement that yes, the Church was corrupt simply isn’t true. The Church can never teach false teachings and never be misled. Her members, as individuals can, though, and the difference is vitally important to keep straight.

 

[johnnykins]

I know how you feel as I went to an Anglican School while I was Jewish, and they were always making snide remarks against the Catholics, which got me interested in why, hence when I read about Catholicism I knew it was all about jealousy and misinformation,
as I was very good at English History, I stood up and told my teacher that when
Henry V111 broke from Rome, he kept all the following Palaces which the present Queen has and keeps as Governor of the Church of England.
Apart from her Jewels, horses, and famous paintings, acres and acres of Land, she also owns

I. Buckingham Palace
2. Windsor Castle
3. Palace of Holyroodhouse
4. Balmoral Castle
5. Sandringham House
6. St. James’s Palace
7. Kensington Palace
8. Clarence House.

Wow - you need to read some history.

Buckingham Palace dates from the early 1700s and was originally build by the Duke of Buckingham. George III acquired it some time in the mid-1700s
Balmoral was purchased by Queen Victoria and Husband privately
Sandringham, too, was purchased by Queen Victoria
Kensington Palace dates from the 17th century
Clarence House was built in the early 19th century
Holyrood House came to the crown through James I

Not sure what point you were trying to make, but the only point you made is that you don’t know history.