Where did reformers get the authority to leave the Catholic Church?

[SSTeacher]

Catholic29;5862027:

I just don’t get why more and more people keep responding in this thread, its abundantly apparent that its going nowhere good fast, at least thats how I see things shaping up here…

I dunno. I enjoyed my parts.

GKC

I also enjoyed the parts you contributed. Thanks for doing so.

It was in 1521 that he was excommunicated. I don’t see how nailing points of discussion on a Church door, at a university where it was common practice, no less, was equal to starting a church? I hear him criticized for not sticking with the Church, to reform from within in. Oct. 31, 1517 was exactly that – an attempt to reform from within.

Jon

I think that what Jon contributed with respect to Martin Luther is helpful. If one assumes that Martin Luther felt sad, disappointed, and indignant about what he saw happening in the Church that he loved it’s perhaps easier to appreciate his actions. However, if one has gotten into the habit of vilifying Martin Luther (it’s one of those learned behaviors that I think is quite easy for Catholics to embrace) then it’s probably quite difficult to give him the benefit of the doubt.

For every hundred people who furtively take their places at the back (preferably behind some tall guys) and constantly mumble about how they don’t agree with what’s going on, there might possibly be one guy who stands up, marches to the front where everybody can see him, and dares to confront the Establishment out in the open because his sense of right and wrong is so acute. The Establishment will go after that guy, with a vengeance, right?

It’s easy to point to the people who were “obedient to the Church” but I would suggest that the reason they come out looking good is because Martin Luther dared to act upon his conscience. Martin Luther was a Catholic priest. I propose that because he was a priest who cared a great deal about truth, he was prepared to take on the Establishment and suffer the consequences. That takes a lot of bottle. Compare his performance with the response of his contemporaries in England when our eighth old man imposed the Oath of Supremacy. Except for Saint John Fisher all the Catholic clergy obligingly rolled over, didn’t they? Yer can’t fault 'em on obedience, though. They were biblically correct, too, according to a superficial interpretation of Romans 13. Agreed?

Well, maybe you agree and maybe you don’t. So let me ask this question.

If you’re a Catholic and you’re critical of Martin Luther for what he did, what do you think he should have done i.e. what would you have done in the circumstances?

a) Stood silently at the back mentally registering strong opposition to the abuses?

b) Asked your priest about the abuses?

c) Asked your priest to ask your bishop about the abuses? :slapfight:

d) Written to Sir Thomas More asking for his comments?

e) Become Orthodox?

f) Other?

Cordially,
Mick

 

[GKC]

“I also enjoyed the parts you contributed. Thanks for doing so.”

You are very welcome. Henry, as I have said, is a hobby of mine, one of many that require a lot of books and a lot of reading. I enjoy discussing him, and other issues (I used to could do Luther, a little, too), to examine history, a little. History is complicated. As a wise man once suggested, it is good to be deep in it. Sometimes things happen, then.

GKC

*Anglicanus-Catholicus *

 

[Lutheranteach]

It comes down to a very simple matter. If you truly feel that God is saying one thing and your Church is saying something quite different, who do you follow?

 

[SSTeacher]

It comes down to a very simple matter. If you truly feel that God is saying one thing and your Church is saying something quite different, who do you follow?

Peter and the other apostles replied: We must obey God rather than men! (Acts 5:29)

Scripturally,
Mick

 

[jmcrae]

Well, maybe you agree and maybe you don’t. So let me ask this question.

If you’re a Catholic and you’re critical of Martin Luther for what he did, what do you think he should have done i.e. what would you have done in the circumstances?

I hope I would have done what St. Francis did, when he was facing similar circumstances 200 years earlier, and what St. Teresa of Avila did under the same circumstances during the same period of history, but in Spain rather than in Germany.

a) Identify the real problem, and leave my ego out of it.

b) Alert my Bishop to the situation.

c) Propose a possible solution

d) Wait for his (name removed by moderator)ut before taking action.

e) When he comes up with a different idea, instead of arguing with him, try it his way.

f) When his way doesn’t work, and he then comes up with my idea as if it were his, leave my ego out of it, and do my idea, without worrying about the fact that he is taking the credit for it.

This works.

 

[Bluegoat]

I hope I would have done what St. Francis did, when he was facing similar circumstances 200 years earlier, and what St. Teresa of Avila did under the same circumstances during the same period of history, but in Spain rather than in Germany.

a) Identify the real problem, and leave my ego out of it.

b) Alert my Bishop to the situation.

c) Propose a possible solution

d) Wait for his (name removed by moderator)ut before taking action.

e) When he comes up with a different idea, instead of arguing with him, try it his way.

f) When his way doesn’t work, and he then comes up with my idea as if it were his, leave my ego out of it, and do my idea, without worrying about the fact that he is taking the credit for it.

This works.

And when your Bishop was clearly involved in the abuse, or planned to do nothing, and you were told to be quiet and get out?

The various reformers faced these kind of responses, not helpful Bishops offering other solutions, or even stealing other people’s.

 

[jmcrae]

And when your Bishop was clearly involved in the abuse, or planned to do nothing, and you were told to be quiet and get out?

Go to Adoration and have a chat with his Boss.

The various reformers faced these kind of responses, not helpful Bishops offering other solutions, or even stealing other people’s.

St. Teresa of Avila and her group of Sisters were made homeless and were wandering the streets for years, while waiting for permission to build their convent.

St. Francis of Assissi was hustled out of the Vatican without being heard at all, and treated like a criminal.

Neither of them ever gave up. They persevered in obedience. They didn’t have it easy. They won because they were* faithful*.

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;5863145:

Well, maybe you agree and maybe you don’t. So let me ask this question.

If you’re a Catholic and you’re critical of Martin Luther for what he did, what do you think he should have done i.e. what would you

have done in the circumstances?I hope I would have done what St. Francis did, when he was facing similar circumstances 200 years earlier, and what St. Teresa of Avila did under the same circumstances during the same period of history, but in Spain rather than in Germany.

a) Identify the real problem, and leave my ego out of it.

b) Alert my Bishop to the situation.

c) Propose a possible solution

d) Wait for his (name removed by moderator)ut before taking action.

e) When he comes up with a different idea, instead of arguing with him, try it his way.

f) When his way doesn’t work, and he then comes up with my idea as if it were his, leave my ego out of it, and do my idea, without worrying about the fact that he is taking the credit for it.

This works.

Overall, I quite like this especially as you’ve opened by declaring that you hope you’d have conducted yourself in this saintly way. Hope springs eternal and all that. But what I don’t particularly like about it is the gratuitous “leave my ego out of it” that you’ve dropped in no less than twice. I suspect the idea is subtly to suggest that, amongst the mediaeval western churchmen, Father Luther was the only one with an inflated ego and that does seem to me to be somewhat unrealistic.

Good effort, nevertheless. Definitely a B+.

Generously,
Mick

 

[jmcrae]

I suspect the idea is subtly to suggest that, amongst the mediaeval western churchmen, Father Luther was the only one with an inflated ego and that does seem to me to be somewhat unrealistic.

If he’d been the only one, he’d have never acquired any followers, and Protestantism would have never left the launching pad …

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;5863615:

I suspect the idea is subtly to suggest that, amongst the mediaeval western churchmen, Father Luther was the only one with an inflated ego and that does seem to me to be somewhat unrealistic.

If he’d been the only one, he’d have never acquired any followers, and Protestantism would have never left the launching pad …

Which seems to bring us back to the stylin’ and profilin’ Albion liege Lord King Henry VIII.:dancing:

Cordially,
Mick

 

[Hesychios]

If he’d been the only one, he’d have never acquired any followers, and Protestantism would have never left the launching pad …

Which seems to bring us back to the stylin’ and profilin’ Albion liege Lord King Henry VIII.:dancing:

http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/40903026a/gifs/Henry8.gif
**Henry Tudor aka King Henry #8 aka “Fidei Defensor” **
"Hit me again, dealer!"

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t630/T630316A.jpg
**Giovanni di Lorenzo de Medici aka Pope Leo #10 **
"Since God has given us the papacy, let us enjoy it."

 

[GKC]

http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/40903026a/gifs/Henry8.gif
**Henry Tudor aka King Henry #8 aka “Fidei Defensor” **
"Hit me again, dealer!"

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t630/T630316A.jpg
**Giovanni di Lorenzo de Medici aka Pope Leo #10 **
"Since God has given us the papacy, let us enjoy it."

Defensor Fidei, usually. See my scintillating post on the story of the title.

And ah, you should have seen the young Prince in his glorious youth, wrestling with Francis I, and all.

GKC

 

[Justy90]

I actually ask this a lot in my USATODAY forum postings and never get an answer. This question I believe is especially necessary for churches which teach that everything has to come from the Bible. I’m reading a book called “The Concise History of the Catholic Church” which does admit that reform was needed in the church and happened too late. There were a lot of problems in the church centuries before the Reformation. But the Bible has never let anyone create their own church. And Jesus said a house divided would fall I believe. There was a verse which had other Christians who were not with the Apostles and Jesus said to leave them alone. For Catholics how do we defend that verse in regards to this question? I just see a king creating a church because he wants to divorce his wife as something being started with evil and sinful motivations. Nationalism was on the roll during this time and I bet had a large factor in what Henry VIII did. But Nationalsim is a world belief and we are taught to have heavenly beliefs. Jesus said “what is the use in calling me ‘Lord, lord’, and not doing what I say?” He said very specific things about divorce. So in regards to the Bible as a whole, where does someone get the authority to create their own church? I’d really like to hear what protestants would say to this question whether or not they believe everything has to come from the Bible. And how can people of the church of England defend their ancestors for joining this church over the one already in existence. Many people died on both sides because of this split.

The Reformers sought to bring back much of what was lost from the Early Church during the medieval times of Catholicism where the church was over taxed with gloom and doom.

 

[Jon_Hus]

Michael007 (church history scholar and theologian) reads The Concise History of the Catholic Church presumably all 650 pages covering 2000 years of history and can’t understand why no one on USATODAY.COM cannot answer a simple question.

Your too knowledgable dude for that crowd. I tried asking a question there after reading Quantum Physics For Dummies book and got the silent treatment also.

 

[Jon_Hus]

… sorry for the dupe.

 

[SSTeacher]

The Reformers sought to bring back much of what was lost from the Early Church during the medieval times of Catholicism where the church was over taxed with gloom and doom.

What, in their view, was lost?

Curiously,
Mick

 

[Justy90]

What, in their view, was lost?

Curiously,
Mick

Much of the traditionalism of the Early Church.

 

[crazzeto]

This thread isn’t going anywhere good. You have your church, we have ours. Just leave it alone. People have been arguing this for 500 years and where has it gotten us?

Hmm, well i can see how a thread like this can devolve. But are you suggesting that the question of authority is some how unimportant to Protistants? Particluarly when you conisder Martin Luther, on his own authroity, altered the bible and theology? How do we know this authority came from God?

 

[jmcrae]

Hmm, well i can see how a thread like this can devolve. But are you suggesting that the question of authority is some how unimportant to Protistants? Particluarly when you conisder Martin Luther, on his own authroity, altered the bible and theology? How do we know this authority came from God?

Good point. Usually when there is a major change in authority, God signifies it by means of miracles (Moses and the parting of the Red Sea, for example; David conquering Goliath; and Jesus with His many miracles) - but I am not aware of any miracles associated with the Reformation, on the Protestant side.

 

[JonNC]

Hmm, well i can see how a thread like this can devolve. But are you suggesting that the question of authority is some how unimportant to Protistants? Particluarly when you conisder Martin Luther, on his own authroity, altered the bible and theology? How do we know this authority came from God?

Just curious, what authority was needed to rearrange the order of the books of the Bible, at least in Luther’s time, and where is that authority specifically written?

Jon

EDIT: Almost forgot, are the Orthodox also acting without authority by having more books in their Bible?