P
Paris_Blues
Guest
Guys,
What’s your opinion on the darn Reformation? Was it REALLY necessary?
What’s your opinion on the darn Reformation? Was it REALLY necessary?
- Status
L
larryo
Guest
Reform was necessary but the so-called Reformation–more properly termed Deformation–was not. Just exactly did Protestantism reform? What abuses that took place at the time of the Reformation still continue?
G
Genesis315
Guest
Paris Blues:
).
Nope, not at all. My genius girlfriend (she’s getting her BA and MA in History at the same time at one of the big three Ivy League schools, and she gets straight A’s) wrote a big paper on the Council of Trent and how it was not totally a reactionary council to the Reformation. The reforms Trent instituted were going to happen with or without the Reformation. So, I’ll agree with her (hmmm, that seems to always happen…I’m so whipped!Guys,
What’s your opinion on the darn Reformation? Was it REALLY necessary?
).
J
JOE_OBERR
Guest
Members of the Church are in constant need of repentance and conversion. What facilitates this are the sacraments, especially Confession & the Eucharist. At times in history when a good number of the Church are not faithful, God will send a saint to help in the conversion process.
What the Church does not, never has and never will “need” is for one of its members to reject Christ, his Church and the leader of his Church and found a man-made church under his own authority. It cannot get much worse in the world than that, as people start looking to man-made sources for truth, instead of the “pillar and foundation of truth, the Church” (1 Tim 3:15).
Joe
What the Church does not, never has and never will “need” is for one of its members to reject Christ, his Church and the leader of his Church and found a man-made church under his own authority. It cannot get much worse in the world than that, as people start looking to man-made sources for truth, instead of the “pillar and foundation of truth, the Church” (1 Tim 3:15).
Joe
C
Contarini
Guest
Historical events are contingent. Aslan never tells us what would have happened. So I don’t think there’s an answer to this question. We have to live with the wreckage of Western Christendom–and also with the insights that have come to us from each of the divided fragments (and yes, I regard the Roman Communion as one of those fragments, although a particularly large and important one which will be the necessary kernel of any reunification).
Edwin
Edwin
F
Fox
Guest
I think that the other faiths should recognise the Catholic faith as the religion that Christ himself instituted and top being selfish thinking they can interpret God’s revelation for themselves.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Would the Catholic Church have cleaned up her act as in selling indulgences and other abuses if she had no competition? Look at how hard she tried to cover her abuses instead of correcting them in just this past century. I think part of the reason the gates of hell cannot prevail against her is that what is kept secret is eventually made known.
Alan
Alan
A
adstrinity
Guest
Hmmmm…speculative.
S
Scalia
Guest
Was the cure worse than the disease?
J
JimG
Guest
No. The Church can be (and has been) reformed without starting new churches. Take Francis of Assisi as an example. God’s command to him was “Francis, rebuild my Church.” He didn’t start a new one.
J
JOE_OBERR
Guest
Alan, the Catholic Church never sold indulgences as they involve prayer and a good work and you can’t sell a prayer or a good work. Plus the CC has never authorized any bishop, priest or religious to sell an indulgence.
Now, in the past some bishops, priests and secular leaders (who had authority from the CC to dispense indulgences) ABUSED their authority in this regard and failed to properly explain the nature and purpose of indulgences in order to personally PROFIT from their dispensation.
They did this under their own authority, not the authority of the CC. The CC authorizes no one to sin, whether by murder or stealing from people via the dispensing of indulgences. When people sin by stealing, murder, or refusing to seek the truth they do so under their own personal authority of which they will be held responsible.
The popes were constantly calling meetings to deal with these disobedient types. If only everyone would obey the Pope there would be no (actual) sin in the world. But people, by the hundreds of millions, refuse to obey the Pope so we end up with people stealing, through abuse of indulgences, lying, committing adultery, abusing drugs, etc.
Finally, the Pope around 1580 AD, as a way of precluding further abuse, terminated the practice of associating money with indulgences. But the teaching on indulgences which was handed down through Apostolic Tradition, was not changed.
Hope this helps.
Joe
H
Hildebrand
Guest
The Reformation was not a reformation, it was a revolt. It would be like calling the American Revolution - the American Reformation. Did our country reform England in the late 1700s, or did we revolt from Enlgand?
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
JOE OBERR:
Priests are married to the church. If they sin while acting in their position within the Church, then the Church has sinned as well and they are responsible for it – which is why we have to pray for sinning priests. They will be held to a higher standard on judgment day because of their positions of authority.
Even the secular community can handle this sort of a problem. If a franchise of a business refuses to abide by the terms of the franchise, they can lose the license to the company name. If the Church can’t do at least as good a job as corporate America at preventing abuses of power in her franchises then she has a serious organizational problem.
.
Thus my theory that if the Church were as arrogant in the 16th century as she apparently was in the 20th about ignoring well known abuses, then I suspect the Reformation played an important role in cleaning up the Church.
Perhaps the many Protestant denominations is a thorn in the side of the Catholic Church, which humble her from time to time so that she may ultimately find glory and be exalted.
Alan
They do it under their own authority, but they do it using the authority from the Church which put them into the position where it was physically possible for them to commit the crimes.
Priests are married to the church. If they sin while acting in their position within the Church, then the Church has sinned as well and they are responsible for it – which is why we have to pray for sinning priests. They will be held to a higher standard on judgment day because of their positions of authority.
If the Church can’t control her spouses, she needs to shed a few. We’re not talking about hundreds of millions of cafeteria Catholics. We are talking about the behavior of duly ordained Church authority figures, abusing the power of their positions. The Church does not have to stand for it.
Even the secular community can handle this sort of a problem. If a franchise of a business refuses to abide by the terms of the franchise, they can lose the license to the company name. If the Church can’t do at least as good a job as corporate America at preventing abuses of power in her franchises then she has a serious organizational problem.
So what I’m asking is, would the Church have stopped this practice if her dirty laundry hadn’t been exposed? Just in the past century, priests facing litigation for child abuse were moved from diocese to diocese. No, the Church chose to wait until imminent huge financial losses started materializing before they got serious about getting the problem under control. What made her think she could shift deviant priests around? It wasn’t that she had taught child abuse was OK, but she certainly failed to do anything about it until it became material.
.
Thus my theory that if the Church were as arrogant in the 16th century as she apparently was in the 20th about ignoring well known abuses, then I suspect the Reformation played an important role in cleaning up the Church.
Perhaps the many Protestant denominations is a thorn in the side of the Catholic Church, which humble her from time to time so that she may ultimately find glory and be exalted.
Alan
T
Thal59
Guest
It is never necessary.
Schism is never acceptable. Just look at what happend in the OT when 10 tribes departed from Judah for a new Israel after the death of Solomon. In a way, it is the ultimate expression of a lack of faith in God. It is as if to say we are leaving the church because the corruption of man is beyond the ability of God to redress. “Man has gone too far, not even God can set this straight!”
Jesus prayed at the last supper for unity in His church. It is a decent bet that the devil was praying for disunity.
Thal59
Schism is never acceptable. Just look at what happend in the OT when 10 tribes departed from Judah for a new Israel after the death of Solomon. In a way, it is the ultimate expression of a lack of faith in God. It is as if to say we are leaving the church because the corruption of man is beyond the ability of God to redress. “Man has gone too far, not even God can set this straight!”
Jesus prayed at the last supper for unity in His church. It is a decent bet that the devil was praying for disunity.
Thal59
- Status