Why all the Fuss on the Reformation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tomyris
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
For the my comment on the Pope - Lutherans (historically) used the idea that the Word was ultimately binding when they felt that their Pope was promulgating (their opinion) things contrary to Christ.
Not sure what you mean by “promulgating” here.

Part of the gift of infallibility that Jesus gave to the Church is what prevents the Pope from “promulgating” error. Popes have certainly been prone to sin (not impeccable), and some have believed heresies or have acted as if they were not Christian at all.

Since the Sacred Tradition entrusted to the Bishops comes from the same Source as the Sacred Scriptures, they two cannot contradict.
 
For the my comment on the Pope - Lutherans (historically) used the idea that the Word was ultimately binding when they felt that their Pope was promulgating (their opinion) things contrary to Christ.
That’s is the crux of Protestants: if they feel that someone is teaching and preaching erroneously, then they defer to the scriptures, and based on their interpretation, tell that someone that they are wrong. That someone does the exact same thing, and an impasse is reached. Who or what did God leave us with to resolve those doctrinal differences that continue to divide Christendom?
 
Not sure what you mean by “promulgating” here.

Part of the gift of infallibility that Jesus gave to the Church is what prevents the Pope from “promulgating” error. Popes have certainly been prone to sin (not impeccable), and some have believed heresies or have acted as if they were not Christian at all.

Since the Sacred Tradition entrusted to the Bishops comes from the same Source as the Sacred Scriptures, they two cannot contradict.
👍
 
If Protestants do, then they ought not make a peep when one of their own people decides to separate.

And…that would bring us back to the tens of thousands of Christian denominations.

Each of those folks separated from their original people, putatively on “justifiable grounds”, and all you Protestant folks who believe that it is permissible to separate on “justifiable grounds” ought not say a word of…protest…about their separation.
👍

And actually - in today’s world, unless there is an extremely divergent view many protestants DON’T protest such separations. Furthermore, in general, protestants don’t seem to mind when someone moves from this community to that one within protestantism. This is how “dulled” they are to being unified - even on the basis of Scripture.

What you describe above - has been going on since the birth of the Protestant reformation. Instead of the Gentiles and Judaizers (aka Lutherans and Calvinists) getting together and resolving their differences so that there is ONE “reformed” Church…they each went their separate ways. Thus establishing forever one of the most foundational principles of Protestantism - the fundamental rejection of Church (ekklesial) authority.

This principle is as (maybe even more) deeply engrained in Protestantism as any Sola.

Peace
James
 
That’s is the crux of Protestants: if they feel that someone is teaching and preaching erroneously, then they defer to the scriptures, and based on their interpretation, tell that someone that they are wrong. That someone does the exact same thing, and an impasse is reached. Who or what did God leave us with to resolve those doctrinal differences that continue to divide Christendom?
This, in obvious violation of the very scriptures they say they espouse!!!
Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.

Jude 1:11 Woe to them! For they walk in the way of Cain, and abandon themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam’s error, and perish in Korah’s rebellion.

Isn’t that incredible?

Great post.
 
That’s is the crux of Protestants: if they feel that someone is teaching and preaching erroneously, then they defer to the scriptures, and based on their interpretation, tell that someone that they are wrong. That someone does the exact same thing, and an impasse is reached. Who or what did God leave us with to resolve those doctrinal differences that continue to divide Christendom?
I believe the answer to this is clearly spelled out in Scripture…
The instructions are contained in Mt 18:15-18
The demonstration of those instructions carried out is contained in Acts 15.

Now if someone objects to this saying that Mt 18 refers to one sinning against another, my response is to ask, “Is preaching a false Gospel (error) a sin”? If it is, then doctrinal disagreements are covered by this passage.
Acts 15 is a wonderful example of these instructions in action…First debate by members of the community - no resolution, Paul gets involved - still no resolution - and eventually the issue is take to “The Church” for a universal resolution.

This then is the biblical prescription for dealing with doctrinal dispute.

And no matter what a protestant thinks of the Catholic Church - Scripture is clear…

Peace
James
 
I believe the answer to this is clearly spelled out in Scripture…
The instructions are contained in Mt 18:15-18
The demonstration of those instructions carried out is contained in Acts 15.

Now if someone objects to this saying that Mt 18 refers to one sinning against another, my response is to ask, “Is preaching a false Gospel (error) a sin”? If it is, then doctrinal disagreements are covered by this passage.
Acts 15 is a wonderful example of these instructions in action…First debate by members of the community - no resolution, Paul gets involved - still no resolution - and eventually the issue is take to “The Church” for a universal resolution.

This then is the biblical prescription for dealing with doctrinal dispute.

And no matter what a protestant thinks of the Catholic Church - Scripture is clear…

Peace
James
👍👍
 
This, in obvious violation of the very scriptures they say they espouse!!!Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.Jude 1:11 Woe to them! For they walk in the way of Cain, and abandon themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam’s error, and perish in Korah’s rebellion.Isn’t that incredible?

Great post.
👍 Not to mention the fact that the church is called the pillar and foundation of truth, something, it seems, that Protestants refuse to address.🤷
 
I believe the answer to this is clearly spelled out in Scripture…
The instructions are contained in Mt 18:15-18
The demonstration of those instructions carried out is contained in Acts 15.

Now if someone objects to this saying that Mt 18 refers to one sinning against another, my response is to ask, “Is preaching a false Gospel (error) a sin”? If it is, then doctrinal disagreements are covered by this passage.
Acts 15 is a wonderful example of these instructions in action…First debate by members of the community - no resolution, Paul gets involved - still no resolution - and eventually the issue is take to “The Church” for a universal resolution.

This then is the biblical prescription for dealing with doctrinal dispute.

And no matter what a protestant thinks of the Catholic Church - Scripture is clear…

Peace
James
👍
 
This, in obvious violation of the very scriptures they say they espouse!!!
Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.

Jude 1:11 Woe to them! For they walk in the way of Cain, and abandon themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam’s error, and perish in Korah’s rebellion.

Isn’t that incredible?

Great post.
👍👍👍

I especially think the part I bolded is so true. Woe to you, Prots!!! Woe!!! Woe!!!

Whoa, now wait…😊 I’m one of them there Prots. I got carried away by all the little blue faced men with the big thumbs and wanted to get in on the excitement of this preaching-to-the-choir fest. :o
 
I’m not sure where you thought anyone here has said: you ought not bring up the faults of the Catholic Church.

But I have certainly never read a single Catholic saying that on this thread.

And I know that this is nothing that I have ever posited.

In fact, I am quite wont* to say: the Catholic Church is imperfect, and acknowledges such here:

“The Church on earth is endowed already with a sanctity that is real though imperfect.” CCC 825
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8678940&postcount=32
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8752956&postcount=888
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8757617&postcount=26
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8949960&postcount=245
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6904051&postcount=742
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8977339&postcount=540
Aww come on, stay with the humor. I come up with or agree to faults on both sides and you humorously bring up that I agree to specific fault of P’s making it seem worth while to those who keep bringing it up, while neglecting your faults are in the same glass window.
 
👍👍👍

I especially think the part I bolded is so true. Woe to you, Prots!!! Woe!!! Woe!!!

Whoa, now wait…😊 I’m one of them there Prots. I got carried away by all the little blue faced men with the big thumbs and wanted to get in on the excitement of this preaching-to-the-choir fest. :o
:rotfl: Ha!
Hurry up and paddle back to the other side of the Tiber before anybody notices! I wont tell.
 
Huh…🤷:eek:

Paul going to Jerusalem at this time had nothing to do with the Judaizers. He was not even sent yet and ordained (in acts 13) at this point.

Anyway, you are missing the point too…what you said here…“Hence the “private” meeting. Paul did not need affirmation but strategic help against the judaizers.”…contradicts the passage:

Galatians 2:2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.

Paul went in response to a revelation…the HS told Paul he needed affirmation about something…not with the Judaizers…but his gospel…what he was going to preach in his missionary journey.

But it also affirms what we have been saying…do not go on your own…go to the Church…get an apostolic pedigree…and the HS, by revelation to Paul…affirmed it…you have the principle of Apostolic Succession here.
Yes, he went after years to Jerusalem, to deal with Judaizers (circumcision). So after many years he needs affirmation ? This was not his first visit. Why would the gospel change after all these years ? What, missionaries have different gospels ? The affirmation was no need to circumcise, as Paul had been doing. The wisdom of all being in the same boat on an issue is not restricted to the narrow view of such succession.
 
Who did the Christ promise the guidance of the HS? Who did Christ say he will build His Church? Did Christ say He will build churches or one church?

And whom did He pray to strengthen his brethen?
To the apostles and all the disciples of the world, followers of Christ (you and me). So where two or more are gathered the Lord is there to what, play tiddly winks ? Peter says the HS fell on Cornelius just as he had on the apostles. John says we, the ecclesia, have the “unction” from the HS, to know all things.
 
:eek:
Absolutely NOT!

Where did you get THAT from?

Ga 2:2 I went up by revelation; and I laid before them (but privately before those who were of repute)** the gospel which I preach** among the Gentiles, lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain.

SCRUPTURE SAYS that he was confirming the gospel which he (St. Paul) preaches.
So what exactly of the gospel needed approving ? That Jesus is Messiah ? That he died for our sins and rose again on the third day ? That he is coming again ? Many on CA will say there is a littany of things to do and be for salvation , for the full gospel . Why can’t you concede that no circumcision was the part of the gospel that needed affirmation ?
 
To the apostles and all the disciples of the world, followers of Christ (you and me). So where two or more are gathered the Lord is there to what, play tiddly winks ?
The “two or more” comment was not directed at “all the disciples of Christ.”

It was directed at the Apostles themselves.
Peter says the HS fell on Cornelius just as he had on the apostles.
Confusing the extraordinary with the ordinary.

The Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius to convince Peter that the Gentiles are to be saved, not as some “proof” that the Spirit acts in anyone apart from those ministers who act in Christ’s name.
John says we, the ecclesia, have the “unction” from the HS, to know all things.
The “we” are those in the Church. Not anyone who says “Lord, Lord” but refuses to enter the kingdom.
 
The “two or more” comment was not directed at “all the disciples of Christ.”

It was directed at the Apostles themselves.

Confusing the extraordinary with the ordinary.

The Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius to convince Peter that the Gentiles are to be saved, not as some “proof” that the Spirit acts in anyone apart from those ministers who act in Christ’s name.
Thou sewest up that which was wrent at our Lord’s shedding blood. The veil was wrent in two, the middle wall of partition is come down and we can all boldly go before the throne, the holy of holies. You have the same respecter of persons attitude as the OT had and divisions amongst the brethren and much middle men. That is old testament and the wrong foreshadow. You really think all that was spoken to apostles was only for them and their institutional successors ? Do you know how many other things you have to take away from lay people if you follow that to the letter ?
 
This, in obvious violation of the very scriptures they say they espouse!!!
Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.

Jude 1:11 Woe to them! For they walk in the way of Cain, and abandon themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam’s error, and perish in Korah’s rebellion.

Isn’t that incredible?

Great post.
What is also incredible is that those leaders expected to be obeyed nd submitted to when they were NOT keeping watch over the souls of the faithful. When scriptures such as these became available to the laity, it was clear to them that the clergy were failing to live up to the standards expected by God of shepherds.

I was told by a man today that he left the Catholic Church because he became disgusted over the scandals.

**Matt 26:31
for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’
**

Satan focuses on bringing down the shepherds because it is one of the best ways to scatter the flock.
To the apostles and all the disciples of the world, followers of Christ (you and me). So where two or more are gathered the Lord is there to what, play tiddly winks ? Peter says the HS fell on Cornelius just as he had on the apostles. John says we, the ecclesia, have the “unction” from the HS, to know all things.
Yes, we have unity by virtue of our mutual faith in Christ, but what the Apostles meant by “we” in speaking about the Chruch is not the same as what you are saying here. They were talking about those validly ordained in unity with the successor of Peter.
Thou sewest up that which was wrent at our Lord’s shedding blood. The veil was wrent in two, the middle wall of partition is come down and we can all boldly go before the throne, the holy of holies. You have the same respecter of persons attitude as the OT had and divisions amongst the brethren and much middle men.
The fact that Jesus established a priesthood does not return the veil that was rent. The new priesthood, though foreshadowed by the old, is of a different order.

You have a misunderstanding about the priesthood in condemning it as “respecter of persons”. Everyone has gifts and callling. The fact that one has one gift, and another a different gift does not mean that one is more “respectable” than anothoer. The priesthood is a life of service to which not everyone is called. The same can be said of motherhood.
. That is old testament and the wrong foreshadow.
And by what authority do you make this assessment?

Should your judgment on this point have more value to us than that of Christ, who teaches us that He is a priest after the order of Melchizedech?
. You really think all that was spoken to apostles was only for them and their institutional successors ?
There were some things spoken only to the ordained and for their successors. Why do you think that nothing of the 40 days after the resurrection are recorded?
. Do you know how many other things you have to take away from lay people if you follow that to the letter ?
The ordained are called to lay down their lives in service to the flock. This is the example that Jesus set, and the one to which those who are caught up into His priesthood are called. This does not “take way” anything from the laity, who need to be equipped by them for the work of the ministry.
 
Thou sewest up that which was wrent at our Lord’s shedding blood. The veil was wrent in two, the middle wall of partition is come down and we can all boldly go before the throne, the holy of holies.
Absurd. You are not the High Priest, Christ is.

You clearly do not understand the Covenant which was enacted by Christ which was explained in the letter to the Hebrews.
"benhur:
You have the same respecter of persons attitude as the OT had and divisions amongst the brethren and much middle men. That is old testament and the wrong foreshadow.
No, the problem is that you follow the ideology of “enlightenment” thinkers who invented the “individualism” of modern evangelical Protestantism as opposed to the Covenantal system understood by ancient Christianity for 1500+ years prior to the invention.

Christ is a Davidic King, and He came to establish a Kingdom which was the Church, headed by Twelve ministers which would be the foundation of His city and united by a prime minister which would hold the keys to His Kingdom.

If the Old Testament foreshadowed Christ, then it also foreshadowed His Kingdom, thus your repudiation of the institutions of the “old testament”, which Christ Himself affirmed, is proof of your rebellion.

The only divisions happened when Protestantism split permanently from the Church, within a few years of its advent in fact the “unity” of Protestantism was undone(as if it had any to begin with).
You really think all that was spoken to apostles was only for them and their institutional successors ? Do you know how many other things you have to take away from lay people if you follow that to the letter ?
There are many things which ought not to be in the hands of lay people, especially among Protestantism.

Authority ought not to be in the hands of lay people, especially untrained lay people who are in fact susceptible to self-deception.
 
Thou sewest up that which was wrent at our Lord’s shedding blood. The veil was wrent in two, the middle wall of partition is come down and we can all boldly go before the throne, the holy of holies. You have the same respecter of persons attitude as the OT had and divisions amongst the brethren and much middle men. That is old testament and the wrong foreshadow. You really think all that was spoken to apostles was only for them and their institutional successors ? Do you know how many other things you have to take away from lay people if you follow that to the letter ?
Um respecter of persons or respecter of Christ?
To respect he who teaches in Christ’s name IS to
respect Christ. Therefore it reasonably follows to
disrespect the ordained priesthood disrespects Christ.

Not to mention Christ sent ONLY his apostles out
with the good news, no moneybags, no extra clothing,
no extra provisions etc.
What does this mean to you? Why those apostles?

Why not everybody? If He intended for the laity to
preach with equal authority why then at the Sermon
on the Zmount with five thousand people there
didn’t He say " now y’all get out there and spread the
Word" ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top