What did Zwingli do?

[quixotic]

Was wondering if anyone knew what Zwingli really did to his followers who ate meat during Lent. It was illegal at that point in time to do so and there have been conflicting information about how he reacted. Dr. Thomas F. Madden of St. Louise University mention in his Modern Scholar course that Zwingli did not came to the aid of his followers and Dr. Brad S. Gregory of Notre Dame University in his Great Courses course said that Zwingli did.
Also, side not question, did JP II ever mention anywhere that if Martin Luther, (former Augustinian monk) would be a saint if he was alive? This was mention by the Theology professor in class, who also happens to be a nun.

 

[ZDHayden]

Was wondering if anyone knew what Zwingli really did to his followers who ate meat during Lent. It was illegal at that point in time to do so and there have been conflicting information about how he reacted. Dr. Thomas F. Madden of St. Louise University mention in his Modern Scholar course that Zwingli did not came to the aid of his followers and Dr. Brad S. Gregory of Notre Dame University in his Great Courses course said that Zwingli did.
Also, side not question, did JP II ever mention anywhere that if Martin Luther, (former Augustinian monk) would be a saint if he was alive? This was mention by the Theology professor in class, who also happens to be a nun.

I don’t know about the Zwingli issue, but as for Martin Luther, he was a heretic, which is an automatic disqualification for canonization - canonization (beatification, and all the steps prior) being conferred upon only those who gave exemplary examples of holy life as Catholics. Luther would be a horrible example for a Catholic - he had renounced his faith and there is, as far as I know, no record of a public or otherwise repentance of his schism.

 

[Katrina5]

One of the myths about the Reformers is that they were good, holy people who just wanted to “reform” the corrupt church.

But when things didn’t go their way, they started new churches. Luther was disobedient.
He was defiant, he was filled with pride, and he and the other Reformers (Calvin, Knox and Zwingli) and finally Henry VIII, would hardly become “saints” because they were heretics.

I’ve also heard that Luther was really, really grouchy and didn’t get along with the other monks.

 

[thistle]

One of the myths about the Reformers is that they were good, holy people who just wanted to “reform” the corrupt church.

But when things didn’t go their way, they started new churches. Luther was disobedient.
He was defiant, he was filled with pride, and he and the other Reformers (Calvin, Knox and Zwingli) and finally Henry VIII, would hardly become “saints” because they were heretics.

I’ve also heard that Luther was really, really grouchy and didn’t get along with the other monks.

You are right. If Luther and the others really had strong faith and trusted in God they would have stayed the course in the Church to help reform any corrupt practices. Instead they were cowards who obviously lacked real faith who turned their backs on God and his Church.

 

[quixotic]

One of the myths about the Reformers is that they were good, holy people who just wanted to “reform” the corrupt church.

But when things didn’t go their way, they started new churches. Luther was disobedient.
He was defiant, he was filled with pride, and he and the other Reformers (Calvin, Knox and Zwingli) and finally Henry VIII, would hardly become “saints” because they were heretics.

I’ve also heard that Luther was really, really grouchy and didn’t get along with the other monks.

That was what Annie told the professor/nun and she said that Annie had only half truths!
she also said that Luther is one of her hero’s! Arg… How can a orthodox Catholic survive this class? Asked her how could JPII have said that Luther should be a saint should he be alive - for one can only be a canonized a saint once one is dead right? She said that was a narrow point of view…

So how do a student prudently and charitably question and answer an ecumenically left leaning nun?

 

[Katrina5]

That was what Annie told the professor/nun and she said that Annie had only half truths!
she also said that Luther is one of her hero’s! Arg… How can a orthodox Catholic survive this class? Asked her how could JPII have said that Luther should be a saint should he be alive - for one can only be a canonized a saint once one is dead right? She said that was a narrow point of view…

So how do a student prudently and charitably question and answer an ecumenically left leaning nun?

This professor is teaching false beliefs and needs to be brought to the attention of the administration.
She is doing a real disservice to the students. What if she taught atheism under the heading of “Religious Studies” and led students astray? They have enough to deal with and most college students are vulnerable at that age. Luther is her “hero”?
This is why the Vatican did the Inquiry last year.

 

[quixotic]

Well… That would be an academic death sentence for she is the Graduate Theology Director.
St Thomas More pray for us… this girl needs his art of diplomacy and the prof/nun needs his conscience
Do you know anything about Zwingli? or if JPII ever mention anything positive about Luther?

 

[Katrina5]

Well… That would be an academic death sentence for she is the Graduate Theology Director.
St Thomas More pray for us… this girl needs his art of diplomacy and the prof/nun needs his conscience
Do you know anything about Zwingli? or if JPII ever mention anything positive about Luther?

Academic death sentence…hanging, guillotine, or burned at the stake? (Just kidding)
It doesn’t matter, it isn’t up to the students to question her judgment, but something should be done to get her back on the right track.
If she is Graduate Theology Director she has a lot of influence. She needs to stay up late at night reading and praying to the Holy Spirit and St Michael.
So she at a college…this is NOT cool.

 

[Katrina5]

Well… That would be an academic death sentence for she is the Graduate Theology Director.
St Thomas More pray for us… this girl needs his art of diplomacy and the prof/nun needs his conscience
Do you know anything about Zwingli? or if JPII ever mention anything positive about Luther?

They were rebellious which to some is a positive thing, and sometimes it is. For example, if a student in this class were to stand up and say, “You are wrong, Graduate Theology Director. You are not teaching what the Catholic Church approves. I’m leaving!” and then went out the door and down to the President’s office.
That’s rebellion in a good way.

JPII canonized so many people (almost half of all canonizations) and he had a long papacy. If he didn’t canonize them, they are off the table. They were destructive, they were proud, and the opposite of what a saint is. They were heretics. Trust the Church on this one.

 

[quixotic]

Told her that and she said that the Church needed to be reformed. So the question was asked “Aren’t we all?” Be holy as the Father in heaven is holy said Jesus. Asked her if Luther revolted instead of reformed in the end and she said no. She then said “You do not know what you are talking about… I am trying to portray Luther in the best light possible…yada yada…”
Now what ? Do not want to fail this class either… Oh… St Thomas More, please help

 

[Katrina5]

Told her that and she said that the Church needed to be reformed. So the question was asked “Aren’t we all?” Be holy as the Father in heaven is holy said Jesus. Asked her if Luther revolted instead of reformed in the end and she said no. She then said “You do not know what you are talking about… I am trying to portray Luther in the best light possible…yada yada…”
Now what ? Do not want to fail this class either… Oh… St Thomas More, please help

If she fails you in this class over her personal beliefs, she must be terminated.
Keep praying, of course, but this woman is in over her head. Why on earth does she want to portray Luther in the best light possible? Is she trying to be politically correct, or “tolerant”?

I think we can all try to see Luther in a good light, but only in that he did cause the Church to reform itself with the Council of Trent. But he was a heretic of the first order, and very destructive. His sin of Pride took over, and this person is following in his footsteps.

 

[Eugenius]

Told her that and she said that the Church needed to be reformed. So the question was asked “Aren’t we all?” Be holy as the Father in heaven is holy said Jesus. Asked her if Luther revolted instead of reformed in the end and she said no. She then said “You do not know what you are talking about… I am trying to portray Luther in the best light possible…yada yada…”
Now what ? Do not want to fail this class either… Oh… St Thomas More, please help

The word ‘saint’ can have different shades of meaning. To some of the reformers a ‘saint’ was a living believer. Like it or not there was a lot of corruption in the church in Luther’s time, he had the courage to say enough is enough and in the end did help bring about reform in the church. Your teacher is probably talking about Luther in terms of his own historical era.

 

[Katrina5]

The word ‘saint’ can have different shades of meaning. To some of the reformers a ‘saint’ was a living believer. Like it or not there was a lot of corruption in the church in Luther’s time, he had the courage to say enough is enough and in the end did help bring about reform in the church. Your teacher is probably talking about Luther in terms of his own historical era.

I think she should at least try to be “balanced”. Show his good side, but he will never be ‘canonized’, either formally or informally.
I’ve heard stories like this before, with all the “ifs ands and buts”, he changed some very important things, such as Authority in the Church. He tossed out some of the books of the Bible. He broke apostolic succession therefore nulled the Eucharist in the church named after him.

It was an ugly time in history. This is why we need more than one source of information.
And we’re way off of Zwingli here.

 

[quixotic]

The word ‘saint’ can have different shades of meaning. To some of the reformers a ‘saint’ was a living believer. Like it or not there was a lot of corruption in the church in Luther’s time, he had the courage to say enough is enough and in the end did help bring about reform in the church. Your teacher is probably talking about Luther in terms of his own historical era.

But even Luther in his own time was opposed and corrected by many, from Eramus, Henry 8 and St Thomas More. From the National Catholic Register - St. Peter, a 15th-century Jesuit sent on mission to Germany, knew how to “harmoniously combine fidelity to dogmatic principles with the respect due to each person,” the Pope said Feb. 9 at his weekly general audience.

erm… do you know anything about Zwingli and how he treated his followers?

 

[quixotic]

I think she should at least try to be “balanced”. Show his good side, but he will never be ‘canonized’, either formally or informally.
I’ve heard stories like this before, with all the “ifs ands and buts”, he changed some very important things, such as Authority in the Church. He tossed out some of the books of the Bible. He broke apostolic succession therefore nulled the Eucharist in the church named after him.

It was an ugly time in history. This is why we need more than one source of information.
And we’re way off of Zwingli here.

That’s the problem. In her eyes, Luther did nothing wrong and talks ever so highly about here and she won’t say exactly where JPII mention that Luther would be a saint.

 

[Contarini]

Told her that and she said that the Church needed to be reformed. So the question was asked “Aren’t we all?” Be holy as the Father in heaven is holy said Jesus. Asked her if Luther revolted instead of reformed in the end and she said no. She then said “You do not know what you are talking about… I am trying to portray Luther in the best light possible…yada yada…”
Now what ? Do not want to fail this class either… Oh… St Thomas More, please help

I don’t understand students who worry about failing a course because they disagree with the professor. Either you don’t understand the situation, or she is a terribly unprofessional professor. You need to show that you understand her perspective, and then explain why you differ.

A lot of Catholics say nice things about Luther because it’s ecumenical. Responding with standard, boiler-plate Luther-bashing doesn’t help. Instead, focus on the specific things she’s saying.

Luther explicitly said that he was not aiming for moral reform–that others had done this and had failed, because they didn’t address the doctrinal problems. The idea that Luther was just calling for moral reform and was kicked out for that is totally ahistorical. Luther from the beginning had a radical theological agenda. It’s right for Catholics to recognize how messed up much of the response to Luther was and how badly the Church needed reform. And I wouldn’t take aim at her for saying that Luther was one of her heroes. Focus on concrete issues.

I’d recommend Heiko Oberman’s Luther: Man between God and the Devil, though it’s hard going if you don’t know something about Luther first. Oberman (may he rest in peace) was a Protestant who had no love for Catholicism, but he trashes a lot of the silly cliches about Luther and portrays him as a radically apocalyptic thinker. My advisor, David Steinmetz (himself a student of Oberman), wrote a book on Luther and Staupitz which shows how different Luther was from a late medieval Augustinian reformer like Staupitz. I went into Reformation studies hoping I could convince myself that the Reformers weren’t really breaking with the Tradition. I convinced myself of the opposite.

Edwin

 

[inkaneer]

The word ‘saint’ can have different shades of meaning. To some of the reformers a ‘saint’ was a living believer. Like it or not there was a lot of corruption in the church in Luther’s time, he had the courage to say enough is enough and in the end did help bring about reform in the church. Your teacher is probably talking about Luther in terms of his own historical era.

Luther reformed nothing. He revolted. He was a theological anarchist. Let the truth be told, Luther was a child abuse victim. You can read that in his own writing. He states he never forgave his father and his mother beat him until he bled for what Luther describes as “an insignificant nut”. Luther early experience with authority was abusive and he simply ran away from it. Rather than study to be a lawyer as his father directed he ran away to the Augustinians. Safe there from his parents he was now subject to the authority of the Augustinians and the church. Again he rebelled. The church in his time was very corrupt to be sure but Luther did not do anything to correct it. He was no Theresa of Avila. Sola scriptura was just another of Luther escapes from authority. This time it was church authority. Finally in the scriptures Luther had an authority that he could control via his interpretation. All went well until others came along and interpreted scripture differently than Luther. Luther would be beset by fits of anger whenever anyone disagreed with him. In the end he was used as a puppet by the German nobility who were desirous of greater power. Luther caused division in the Body of Christ. He did nothing to uplift the church. He is and was no saint and this nun should be reportedto the bishop of the diocese in which this university resides. I would not even bother with the university. Go to the bishop. This is occurring in his jurisdiction where he is the shepherd of the flock. He needs to know that he has a wolf amongst the sheep…

 

[quixotic]

I don’t understand students who worry about failing a course because they disagree with the professor. Either you don’t understand the situation, or she is a terribly unprofessional professor. You need to show that you understand her perspective, and then explain why you differ.
Edwin

The reason being that our results are based on question and answer, not essays. To prove that we understand and pay attention in class, we have to answer in the way that she a given us. Tried it once, with other citations, all she did was pooh-poohed it saying that it was not fully right and when using verses to back up or counter claims made by Luther and Calvin, was told that we can’t take one verse and make it our agenda - but someone Luther can?

Have been reading a lot about the reformation, studying works by Thomas F Madden (thomasmadden.org) and Brad S Gregory of Notre Dame (history.nd.edu/people/all/gregory-brad)

 

[inkaneer]

The reason being that our results are based on question and answer, not essays. To prove that we understand and pay attention in class, we have to answer in the way that she a given us. Tried it once, with other citations, all she did was pooh-poohed it saying that it was not fully right and when using verses to back up or counter claims made by Luther and Calvin, was told that we can’t take one verse and make it our agenda - but someone Luther can?

Have been reading a lot about the reformation, studying works by Thomas F Madden (thomasmadden.org) and Brad S Gregory of Notre Dame (history.nd.edu/people/all/gregory-brad)

Report this nun to the bishop IMMEDIATELY! She is a wolf among the sheep and the shepherd has to be told about it.

 

[Contarini]

The reason being that our results are based on question and answer, not essays. To prove that we understand and pay attention in class, we have to answer in the way that she a given us.

What kinds of questions? I mean, does she ask questions like, “Did Luther revolt against the Church” expecting you to say “no”?

As a professor, I find it tricky to ask good questions that won’t force students to agree with me. If what I ask is even remotely controversial, I try to say something like “according to the textbook” or “according to your professor.” Not saying that I always remember to do this, but I try. I think it’s fair to assume that if it’s an “objective” question you should give the answer she wants–write in the margin that you don’t agree if you want to. Again, if she’s fair she will respect that. She has a right to make sure that you’ve heard what she’s saying. I got very frustrated last semester with students who kept giving me boilerplate evangelical Sunday School stuff like “the kingdom of heaven is where we go when we die” or “apocalyptic literature is about predicting the end times,” when I’d given a very different definition in class. But I bent over backwards to make it clear that I wasn’t trying to force them to agree with me–I just wanted to know that they were processing what I was saying.

Speaking for myself, intelligent disagreement is one of the things that most delights me in a student! She’s probably trying to combat what she sees as unthinking prejudices held by Catholic students. Show her that you are in fact thinking, and you should be fine. (Not promising anything, though–some professors really are out to force students to agree with their agenda.)

Tried it once, with other citations,

Tried what? To give an answer other than what she wanted? Citations from what?

all she did was pooh-poohed it saying that it was not fully right and when using verses to back up or counter claims made by Luther and Calvin, was told that we can’t take one verse and make it our agenda - but someone Luther can?

Well, I don’t find Luther doing that for the most part. (I think he read Scripture wrong in a number of ways, but I wouldn’t say he was basing it on one verse.) But even if he did–no, that doesn’t make it OK for you! Luther isn’t in the class

If you are trying to refute Luther and Calvin using prooftexts, then I would have problems with that too. The discussion needs to go deeper than slinging isolated verses of Scripture around. (Yes, sixteenth-century Christians did use prooftexts, but by and large they tried to look at context.)

Have been reading a lot about the reformation, studying works by Thomas F Madden (thomasmadden.org) and Brad S Gregory of Notre Dame (history.nd.edu/people/all/gregory-brad)

Those are good scholars. I didn’t know Madden wrote about the Reformation. Gregory’s Salvation at Stake is a good book–it got a lot of flak in the guild for its rather belligerent attack on “theoretical” approaches, and I think some of the criticisms were valid, but I still liked the book a lot.

However, don’t confine yourself to Catholic scholars. (Not saying you are doing so deliberately–I didn’t know Gregory was Catholic till after reading Salvation at Stake–the book is extremely fair to both sides in my opinion. Madden’s a bit more of an apologists, though certainly still a solid scholar.)