The devil was part of the Reformation

[Lapsed]

Lilyofthevalley:

Those are some of the stupidest comments I have ever read.

Actually, it’s a rather astute observation. Catholics believe the Catholic Church is God’s true Church on earth. Splintering the body of the faithful can only be construed as the work of the devil.

From a Protestant perspective, a Protestant must at least tacitly believe the Catholic Church is under the influence of the devil otherwise there is no legitimate reason not to join with the Catholic Church.

After all, if the devil isn’t active in the Catholic Church, then its claims of apostolic succession and an unbroken Magesterium growing from the deposit of Sacred Tradition which she guards must be valid.

From a Christian perspective it’s either/or - the devil is either in Protestantism or Catholicism.

 

[Paris_Blues]

Lapsed:

From a Christian perspective it’s either/or - the devil is either in Protestantism or Catholicism.

At first before I converted to Catholicism, I REALLY thought the Pope was the anti-Christ and the devil was part of the CC…boy, I was wrong big time!

THAT’S when I learned and realized - with God’s Grace - that the CC is the TRUE Church established by Jesus Christ. That’s when I realized that 2,000 years ago, there was NO PROTESTANTISM…until the 16th century…hmmmmm…something fishy going on.

I have NOTHING against Protestants themselves…I do have a problem with the fact that it split from the CC because that’s NOT what our Lord established friends!

Why can’t some people get that through their heads?!?

 

[Lapsed]

Paris Blues:

I have NOTHING against Protestants themselves…I do have a problem with the fact that it split from the CC because that’s NOT what our Lord established friends!

Why can’t some people get that through their heads?!?

I agree. There is nothing against any Protestants as people. We all strive to live according to the light we are given. The diabolic influence lies primarily in the fracturing of the people of God, not in the specific teachings of any particular denomination.

 

[Thal59]

I saw the program too. It is called “The Word of God” by Fr. Corapi and it can be purchased at the EWTN website. Someday I will, but I can’t afford it right now.

I find it amusing when Protestants consider the division, persecution, hatred, and murder that has occured because of the reformation and yet somehow believe the devil was not involved!

Some Protestants accuse the RCC of being Satanic; the pope is the anti-Christ, its rituals are pagan in origin, we are idol worshippers, etc.

I look at it this way…

If praying to saints was ineffective, the devil wouldn’t care if we did or not. However, if praying to the saints is beneficial to us… the devil would deride the practice to deprive us of its fruits.

Many Protestant churches deride the practice.

If praying to Mary was ineffective, the devil wouldn’t care if we did or not. However, if praying to Mary is beneficial to us… the devil would deride the practice to deprive us of its fruits.

Many Protestant churches deride the practice.

If confession in church to the priest is ineffective, the devil wouldn’t care if we did or not. However, if confession in church to the priest is beneficial to us… the devil would deride the practice to deprive us of absolution, etc.

Many Protestant churches deride the practice.

If the Eucharist is NOT the Real Presence of the Lord, the devil would not care if we thought it was. If the Eucharist IS the Real Presence of the Lord, the devil would deride the belief, or perhaps reduce it to mere symbolism.

Many Protestant churches reduce the sacrament of the Eucharist as mere symbolism.

You can do this with almost any Catholic belief that Protestants don’t agree with.

Thal59

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Paris Blues:

I was watching Fr. Corapi on EWTN a week ago or so and he was talking about how Catholics read the Bible, etc.

At the end, he was telling about how the Scripture where Jesus says to Peter something like Satan wants to have you and to shift you like wheat (don’t know what Gospel that’s in but I know I’ve seen it before) and that our Lord was praying for Peter especially.

Fr. was telling the correct interpretation of it. It was that when our Lord said Satan wants to have you, the “you” was plural, like to have ALL of the disciples, etc. and the “you” in shift you like wheat, was plural as well (to shift you ALL). But when our Lord said that He would pray for Peter especially because unity wouuld be kept or something like that. Did anyone catch this program on TV to know what I’m talking about?

Well, anyway, Fr. went on to say what happens when you go away from Peter? Satan shifts us all! He said so when Martin Luther left, Wesley, all the other Protestant ones left, Satan shifts them all and now we have over 60,000 Christian denominations teaches this and that, etc.!

That’s exactly what I thought, that the devil was part of the Reformation.

Why? Think about it. You REALLY think that ALL interpretations of the Bible match? NO. Do we agree on them? NO. Do they cause confusion? YES. Remember, Satan causes confusion! It’s NOT the Holy Spirit. And that’s EXACTLY what he wanted to do: to lead people away from the Truth!

Now look at our brethren…they have been strayed away from Truth!:crying:

Now I understand: the CC is the only Church that stands in unity because it IS THE TRUE Church founded by our Lord and what our Lord said was true because the proof is right in front of our eyes. Make sense?

There is no clear cut division between Catholics and Protestants, such as this ides implies; as though one could point to:​

Catholics - in the virtuous corner, all squeaky clean and sinless

and

Protestants - in the evil corner, all filthy and uniquely evil.

That’s not history - it’s doubtfully Christian, because it makes too tidy a division between groups of people.

The idea separates the sheep from the goats before Christ sees fit to do so - which means that human beings are trying to do what only Christ, Who alone knows what is in man, can do, and has not yet done. Since both are to “grow until the harvest”, and since that harvest has yet to be reaped, to divide human beings into tidy groups is not for us to do - especially as we belong to one of those groups, and will not know which until the Judgement. We just aren’t equipped to make that separation - for we who judge, are ourselves constantly being judged, not least by our reactions to others.

And, it is far too simple - and history is not simple; it’s complicated, ambiguous, perplexing. Rather than being like an avenue of trees planted at intervals, clearly separate from each other, it’s like a jungle. Historical facts don’t take well to being chopped up with a machete - and chopped-up history is what one gets if one tries to make out that one group is uniquely evil, and another is wholly spotless. History is not black and white - its a lot of other colours, because it is the experience of flawed human beings.

Which is also why sweeping judgements have no place in historical study - “All the Reformers were evil” is as useless and deceptive as saying “All Popes are evil”.

There may be a demonic element in the Reformation - but that is a theological judgement; not an historical one. Because history is complex, and because man is sinful and flawed and foolish, and because Catholics and Protestants have the same nature and temptations, one cannot say “This group is bad” unless one says the same of other human groups - including one’s own. That is one of the reasons why it is so pointless for one Christian group to belittle another - they are all under judgement, and all under grace.

What such belittling forgets, is that we are saved and protected by God’s grace - not by any native strength of ours. So if we are not all axe-murderers and devil-worshippers, that is no reason for us to boast at all.

Where does evil comes from ? Our own wicked hearts.
What stops us doing evil ? Nothing but God’s mercy.

 

[Angainor]

scylla:

I would stay away from saying 60,000 as a number though even some people have a problem with 25,000 different denominations and use the number as an excuse ignore the evil of division and argue over the accuracy of numbers. I prefer to say there are thousands of divisions with more each week as it spreads.

So you are saying Roman Catholicism is one of tens of thousands of Christian Denominations. Forgive me, but what is the point exactly? Is it inherently wrong to have so many denominations? If so, why don’t you let all those other denominations into yours so we can have just one? One big tent.

 

[bekalc]

Angainor:

So you are saying Roman Catholicism is one of tens of thousands of Christian Denominations. Forgive me, but what is the point exactly? Is it inherently wrong to have so many denominations? If so, why don’t you let all those other denominations into yours so we can have just one? One big tent.

Catholicism is twice as big as all Protestant churches…We would happily allow Protestants to join us, but it would involve us agreeing on certain core doctrines, and on how we will solve future issues. Protestants don’t agree with us on the different doctrines, and they don’t agree with each other.

Michael. The Catechism clearly states that the divisions in Christianity occurred because of faults on both sides of the divide. We had some really bad and corrupt leaders.

Still Scripture warns that people will walk away and follow certain leaders (what they want to hear.) I think it is fair to say thats what Protestants did, and well that Scripture warns of that fact…Your right we cannot say “Catholics perfect” and Protestants bad. Perhaps the reformers even meant well…

But we can at the very least look at the situation and the fact that many of the Reformers not only condemned the Catholic Church but condemned each other because of their own disagreements. None of the reformers were exactly men who were willing to listen to anyone else/someone who disagreed with them.

 

[Angainor]

bekalc:

Still Scripture warns that people will walk away and follow certain leaders (what they want to hear.) I think it is fair to say thats what Protestants did

There were no leaders that Catholics followed? ?

I truly think a necessary first step toward any reconciliation is for Catholics to see the Reformation in a new light. Luther did not invent his ideas in 1517. There were groups within the Church with “Catholic” ideas and “Protestant” ideas for centuries. Things were held together artificially. At the Reformation those groups finally simply parted company.

Until Catholics see that Catholics and Protestants were walking away from eachother, I don’t see how there can be any healing.

 

[RiverRock]

Paris Blues:

At first before I converted to Catholicism, I REALLY thought the Pope was the anti-Christ and the devil was part of the CC…boy, I was wrong big time!

THAT’S when I learned and realized - with God’s Grace - that the CC is the TRUE Church established by Jesus Christ. That’s when I realized that 2,000 years ago, there was NO PROTESTANTISM…until the 16th century…hmmmmm…something fishy going on.

I have NOTHING against Protestants themselves…I do have a problem with the fact that it split from the CC because that’s NOT what our Lord established friends!

Why can’t some people get that through their heads?!?

Cause so many people have been brainwashed against it. Simple as that. Their minds won’t even consider the possibility for a moment that it’s true. Same way they skip over obviously Catholic verses in scripture.

 

[Fidelis]

Angainor:

Luther did not invent his ideas in 1517. There were groups within the Church with “Catholic” ideas and “Protestant” ideas for centuries. Things were held together artificially. At the Reformation those groups finally simply parted company.

I’m sorry, but this is an absolute myth. Perhaps there was a fringee here or there that taught or believed something *similar * to what the “Reformers” developed, but there is no evidence of anything in Church history even approaching a recognizable school of thought on ANY “Reformed” doctrine–most notably Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, and private interpretation. None.

 

[KnightErrantJR]

Even Luther acknowlaged that the Church held the truth of Christ’s teachings until such time as the “reformers” ended up splitting off from them. In other words, Luther even said that the Church, as a whole, was indeed correct “to a point.” Of course, the reason for this is, where did all the knowlage of Christianity that he drew upon come from if not the Church.

Of course, its also interesting to note that Luther not only took books out of the Old Testament, but books from the New Testament as well, which subsequent protestants put back in, and Lutherans eventually did as well. So how does this work with Sola Scriptura?

 

[Angainor]

Fidelis:

I’m sorry, but this is an absolute myth. Perhaps there was a fringee here or there that taught or believed something *similar *to what the “Reformers” developed, but there is no evidence of anything in Church history even approaching a recognizable school of thought on ANY “Reformed” doctrine–most notably Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, and private interpretation. None.

Perhaps there were no doctrines as refined as Sola Scriptura etc., but I don’t see those things as representing the essence of Protestantism anyhow.As to the Church it has no visible head. St. Peter he goes on, received no more power or authority than the other Apostles, and it is uncertain that he ever came to Rome. The pope has only the power of convoking an ecumenical council which is superior to him. His decrees are not binding; he can impose on the people only what the general council has decided and interpreted.

Describing the views of Marsilius of Padua A.D. 1280-1342

Fidelis:

there is no evidence of anything in Church history even approaching a recognizable school of thought on ANY “Reformed” doctrine

Where would one go about developing a “recognizable school of thought”? Marsilius of Padua was driven from his university post for his views. This is what I meant when I said that things were held together artificially.

 

[Angainor]

KnightErrantJR:

Even Luther acknowlaged that the Church held the truth of Christ’s teachings until such time as the “reformers” ended up splitting off from them. In other words, Luther even said that the Church, as a whole, was indeed correct “to a point.” Of course, the reason for this is, where did all the knowlage of Christianity that he drew upon come from if not the Church.

Of course Luther said that. It is true. Where else would knowledge of Christianity come from if not the Church? As far as the “correct ‘to a point’” part, Luther was probably speaking of Catholicism.

KnightErrantJR:

Of course, its also interesting to note that Luther not only took books out of the Old Testament, but books from the New Testament as well, which subsequent protestants put back in, and Lutherans eventually did as well. So how does this work with Sola Scriptura?

Fortunately Protestants believe in Sola Scriptura and not Sola Martin Luther.

 

[bekalc]

KnightErrantJR:

Even Luther acknowlaged that the Church held the truth of Christ’s teachings until such time as the “reformers” ended up splitting off from them. In other words, Luther even said that the Church, as a whole, was indeed correct “to a point.” Of course, the reason for this is, where did all the knowlage of Christianity that he drew upon come from if not the Church.

Of course, its also interesting to note that Luther not only took books out of the Old Testament, but books from the New Testament as well, which subsequent protestants put back in, and Lutherans eventually did as well. So how does this work with Sola Scriptura?

Aquinor. If the Protestants and the Catholics existed equally, than why weren’t there any Protestants in the Orthodox/Oriental churches. The issues that divide us the main ones which is mainly the bondage of the will. (That not sola faith was the real dividing point in the reformation) There is a form of sola faith that can be orthodox in Catholicism in dealing with intial justification.

The point is that on almost every point, the other ancient churches (except for papal infallibitly) sided with Catholicism. If your ideas were in the Church before Luther than the Orthodox wouldn’t have been against them.

 

[Angainor]

bekalc:

Aquinor. If the Protestants and the Catholics existed equally, than why weren’t there any Protestants in the Orthodox/Oriental churches.

1 Kings 19:10,14,18

 

[KnightErrantJR]

But that is my point . . . if Luther was inspired to see the flaws in the Church, but he made mistakes, i.e. took books out of the Bible that should have been left in, and other reformers came after him . . . if there is no appostolic progression and no magisterium to carefully considered major decisions, then how do you know that the protestants that came later are right? How do you know that you aren’t just all making up rules as you go along, and straying further and further from what God originally intended.

Just take divine inspiration out of this for a moment. A group of people that have be taught a certain way and are asked to come up with a statement or solution to a problem are likely to reign each other in if someone starts to go off on a tangent, but one man, by himself, no matter how well meaning, can stray pretty far. How would you know that ONE MAN was the one inspired by the Holy Spirit to make changes?

Oh, and another thing that Luther did that other protestants followed suit in . . . the “by faith ALONE” was not a statement found in the Bible, but Luther was “moved” to place the word alone there to reinforce his view.

 

[Angainor]

KnightErrantJR:

But that is my point . . . if Luther was inspired to see the flaws in the Church, but he made mistakes, i.e. took books out of the Bible that should have been left in, and other reformers came after him . . . if there is no appostolic progression and no magisterium to carefully considered major decisions, then how do you know that the protestants that came later are right? How do you know that you aren’t just all making up rules as you go along, and straying further and further from what God originally intended.

1 Th 5:21 - Test everything. Hold on to the Good.

KnightErrantJR:

…one man, by himself, no matter how well meaning, can stray pretty far. How would you know that ONE MAN was the one inspired by the Holy Spirit to make changes?

Good question. Go ask the pope.

KnightErrantJR:

Oh, and another thing that Luther did that other protestants followed suit in . . . the “by faith ALONE” was not a statement found in the Bible, but Luther was “moved” to place the word alone there to reinforce his view.

I don’t care about that. I have a reliable translation in front of me.

 

[KnightErrantJR]

You mean the Pope that is chosen to be the Head of the Church by the College of Cardinals, who are in direct Apostolic progression from the followers of Christ himself when he was on earth . . . Hey, I would love to get that kind of audience!

 

[BlestOne]

Angainor,
Don’t forget that the college of Cardinals is guided by the Holy Spirit…I think that counts as many more than 1 man!

 

[JKirkLVNV]

A very wise and orthodox priest told me once that every heresy has within it an unemphasized truth, something that the Church must, to fight the heresy, then emphasize. There were abuses in the Church at the time of the Reformation, you know. If there weren’t, then we wouldn’t have had Trent and the counter-reformation. Of course, Satan loves division, but remember the words of OUR catechism:

“But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame.”