Why did the Protestant Reformation happen?

[Denise1957]

I think the Franciscan Friars of the Atonement in Rome are Catholic:

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_church3.html#3.4

Catholicism works differently than the Lutheran churches. A group or order of Franciscans does not actually have the authority to proclaim that Lutheran orders are valid. I assume that they have good intentions, but that’s not enough. However, if you can cite an authoritative document, such as on the Vatican website, which contains authoritative documents, then that might work.

 

[GKC]

Catholicism works differently than the Lutheran churches. A group or order of Franciscans does not actually have the authority to proclaim that Lutheran orders are valid. I assume that they have good intentions, but that’s not enough. However, if you can cite an authoritative document, such as on the Vatican website, which contains authoritative documents, then that might work.

Sounds familiar.

GKC

 

[steido01]

Sounds familiar.

Quite.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Catholicism works differently than the Lutheran churches. A group or order of Franciscans does not actually have the authority to proclaim that Lutheran orders are valid. I assume that they have good intentions, but that’s not enough. However, if you can cite an authoritative document, such as on the Vatican website, which contains authoritative documents, then that might work.

Please just go to the Holy See website for a full account of all these documents:
w2.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html

Its one thing to question the document but to also question the source seems petty!

 

[Denise1957]

Please just go to the Holy See website for a full account of all these documents:
w2.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html

Its one thing to question the document but to also question the source seems petty!

The link to the Vatican website did not show anything about the issue regarding the validity of Lutheran orders.

I understand that you believe that Lutheran orders are valid. But I would hope that you can understand that I have to see documentation from authoritative Catholic sources before I believe it. As a Catholic (Roman, that is) I’m not compelled to accept the Lutheran interpretation of the situation.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

The link to the Vatican website did not show anything about the issue regarding the validity of Lutheran orders.

I understand that you believe that Lutheran orders are valid. But I would hope that you can understand that I have to see documentation from authoritative Catholic sources before I believe it. As a Catholic (Roman, that is) I’m not compelled to accept the Lutheran interpretation of the situation.

Clearly you are not reading so what can I say? You are on your own.

 

[Denise1957]

Clearly you are not reading so what can I say? You are on your own.

Are you referring to the Vatican link? If so, you should click on the link yourself. It’s the main page of the website; maybe you thought you were linking to a specific page regarding Lutherans.

 

[Abu]

The great Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, as Cardinal Ratzinger, wrote of Luther’s contempt for the Sacrament of Holy Orders: “all the bitterness of the young reformer against the existing priesthood in such shocking exclamations” as the following; “O you princes, not of the Catholic Church, but of the synagogue of Satan, yes of darkness.” [Cited in *Principles of Catholic Theology, Ignatius, 1987, p 261, from Luther’s Babylonian Captivity].

re: ordination of bishops and priests
Question from confused on 06-07-2009:
Wouldn’t the first ministers in succession to Luther also be valid but illicit? Or was Luther not a Bishop?

**Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 06-07-2009 (EWTN): **
Luther was not a bishop. He was a priest. He could not have validly ordained anyone.
tinyurl.com/nz4ygeu

Answer by Catholic Answers on 06-19-2012 (EWTN):
Lutherans do not have Mass and do not have a valid communion. Catholics may not receive an invalid Eucharist under any circumstances. I cannot recommend that any Catholic attend a non-Catholic service who does not know his own faith or the faith of non-Catholics well enough to know something that basic about Christianity. Such a Catholic would be better advised to learn his own faith before exposing himself to that of others’.

Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
tinyurl.com/p47qyfs

 

[JWH123]

Why did the Protestant Reformation happen? Could the Reformation and the negative ramifications that came for it (bloodshed, massacre of Catholics in Protestant countries, international warfare, discrimination of Catholics, etc. )have been prevented?

Luther felt (and in some cases was justified in thinking) that the Church of Rome had become heretical and a church of man rather than a church of God. But since the Pope can’t be impeached like a President can, his answer was to create his own church that made sure to not only not follow the teachings he thought were heresies, but made a point of emphasizing the wrongs that were going on.

The Reformation actually helped the Catholic Church in some ways, getting its doctrine back to soundness, as opposed to corrupted by humans. For example, the Papacy had somehow devised a concept that people could purchase indulgences, effectively buying their way out of Purgatory. Prior to this (and today), the Church has held that Purgatory is an ESSENTIAL means of purifying the soul before it can enter Heaven, for as noted in Revelation, “nothing impure shall enter the Kingdom.” No rational Catholic can look at this scripture passage and honestly believe that paying money to somebody (God doesn’t need our money and we can’t buy anything from God with our money!!) would somehow relieve us of having to go through this essential purification process. This sale of indulgences was irrational at least, and criminal at worst. But if it weren’t for the Reformation, here in 2014 we might still be taught that we can, and need to, buy our way into Heaven at the moment of death!

Unfortunately, Luther took things too far and as a way of protesting the Indulgence sale, decided to discredit the entire doctrine of Purgatory hook line and sinker. And to do this, he found one of the 14 scripture passages that allude to Purgatory in some way and chopped that book from the Bible (not realizing that other scriptures that were left in still pointed to its existence). Oh well, Luther was just a man. And men aren’t perfect. He missed the parts of the Gospels, the Epistles, Revelation, and Jewish tradition which, when understood, prove that Purgatory is a reality.

 

[Abu]

JWH123 #169
The Reformation actually helped the Catholic Church in some ways, getting its doctrine back to soundness, as opposed to corrupted by humans. For example, the Papacy had somehow devised This sale of indulgences was irrational at least, and criminal at worst. But if it weren’t for the Reformation, here in 2014 we might still be taught that we can, and need to, buy our way into Heaven at the moment of death!

False. There was never, and never will be, a corruption of doctrine as taught by the Church, and the Protestant revolt helped nothing good. “The Papacy” had NOT “somehow devised” a “sale of indulgences”. Such falsehood by Catholics shows the level of misunderstanding so often expressed here.

**The Protestant Reformation/ Indulgences
Question from Shane Brinegar on 11-06-2002: **
Many Protestant Theologians and Secular Historians say that the Church was corrupt during the time of the Reformation, and that it had fallen away from true Biblical Doctrines. They claim this is what lead Luther to Reform and his 95 theses. I have also read this in many church history books. Is the literature correct? Did Tetzel really preach, When the coin in the coffer rings the soul from purgatory springs. It sounds as though the church was using the sale of indulgences, as a way of taxation? Please Clarify. God Bless, Shane

**Answer by Fr. John Echert on 11-06-2002 (EWTN): **
No more true than for one who claims a few hundred years from now that during the time of the present sex scandal, the Church herself had fallen from her moral teaching on sexuality. Indulgences are a valid theological reality, and if in times past some abused the legitimate practice regarding these, that is a failure of members of the institutional aspect of the Church, not the Church herself, who remains always the spotless Bride of Christ. The analogy fits and is a reminder to Catholics to distinguish between the divinely appointed and guided Holy Church and the fallible human element within her. [My emphasis].
tinyurl.com/kg274px

 

[corelarry]

Default Why did the Protestant Reformation happen?
Why did the Protestant Reformation happen? Could the Reformation and the negative ramifications that came for it (bloodshed, massacre of Catholics in Protestant countries, international warfare, discrimination of Catholics, etc. )have been prevented?
Reply With Quote Multi-Quote This Message

 

[JonNC]

The link to the Vatican website did not show anything about the issue regarding the validity of Lutheran orders.

I understand that you believe that Lutheran orders are valid.

Thanks, Denise,
And he should believe so. Lutherans, while wanting and desiring and praying for reciprocity from Rome in regards to receiving the validity of orders, it should not be for Lutherans the measuring stick as to whether or not our orders are valid. We know they are by divine law, and by the examples from the historic Church.
That’s not a knock at the Catholic Church, as we understand and respect your view, historically.

But I would hope that you can understand that I have to see documentation from authoritative Catholic sources before I believe it. As a Catholic (Roman, that is) I’m not compelled to accept the Lutheran interpretation of the situation.

Just as I am not compelled to be our orders invalid because Rome says so, you should not, cannot, be expected to be moved to believe that ours are valid. It is the nature of our division, though one that I believe is not going to be a major stumbling block as we move closer.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

False. There was never, and never will be, a corruption of doctrine as taught by the Church, and the Protestant revolt helped nothing good. “The Papacy” had NOT “somehow devised” a “sale of indulgences”. Such falsehood by Catholics shows the level of misunderstanding so often expressed here.

**The Protestant Reformation/ Indulgences
Question from Shane Brinegar on 11-06-2002: **
Many Protestant Theologians and Secular Historians say that the Church was corrupt during the time of the Reformation, and that it had fallen away from true Biblical Doctrines. They claim this is what lead Luther to Reform and his 95 theses. I have also read this in many church history books. Is the literature correct? Did Tetzel really preach, When the coin in the coffer rings the soul from purgatory springs. It sounds as though the church was using the sale of indulgences, as a way of taxation? Please Clarify. God Bless, Shane

**Answer by Fr. John Echert on 11-06-2002 (EWTN): **
No more true than for one who claims a few hundred years from now that during the time of the present sex scandal, the Church herself had fallen from her moral teaching on sexuality. Indulgences are a valid theological reality, and if in times past some abused the legitimate practice regarding these, that is a failure of members of the institutional aspect of the Church, not the Church herself, who remains always the spotless Bride of Christ. The analogy fits and is a reminder to Catholics to distinguish between the divinely appointed and guided Holy Church and the fallible human element within her. [My emphasis].
tinyurl.com/kg274px

Father John’s statement has truth in it, but from the aspect of the title of the thread, if the failure of the members of the Church was the order of the day in a given area in the 1,500’s, and if the teaching of the day supported some of those failures, the it shouldn’t be surprising that some theologians would rise up against those failures, assuming them to be the teaching of the Church.

Jon

 

[Denise1957]

False. There was never, and never will be, a corruption of doctrine as taught by the Church, and the Protestant revolt helped nothing good. “The Papacy” had NOT “somehow devised” a “sale of indulgences”. Such falsehood by Catholics shows the level of misunderstanding so often expressed here.

**The Protestant Reformation/ Indulgences
Question from Shane Brinegar on 11-06-2002: **
Many Protestant Theologians and Secular Historians say that the Church was corrupt during the time of the Reformation, and that it had fallen away from true Biblical Doctrines. They claim this is what lead Luther to Reform and his 95 theses. I have also read this in many church history books. Is the literature correct? Did Tetzel really preach, When the coin in the coffer rings the soul from purgatory springs. It sounds as though the church was using the sale of indulgences, as a way of taxation? Please Clarify. God Bless, Shane

**Answer by Fr. John Echert on 11-06-2002 (EWTN): **
No more true than for one who claims a few hundred years from now that during the time of the present sex scandal, the Church herself had fallen from her moral teaching on sexuality. Indulgences are a valid theological reality, and if in times past some abused the legitimate practice regarding these, that is a failure of members of the institutional aspect of the Church, not the Church herself, who remains always the spotless Bride of Christ. The analogy fits and is a reminder to Catholics to distinguish between the divinely appointed and guided Holy Church and the fallible human element within her. [My emphasis].
tinyurl.com/kg274px

It’s good that you brought up these quotes. Indulgences are indeed a valid theological reality, and as is quoted above, “if in times past some abused the legitimate practice regarding these (which there was) that is a failure of the institutional aspect of the Church, not the Church herself, which always remains the spotless Bride of Christ.” My understanding is that the problem with indulgences and the money from it being used for purposes not in keeping with the mission of the Church was later defined at Trent.

As to sexual scandal to which Luther was rightly appalled, these scandals have come and gone throughout the history of the Church. Such is fallen human nature. Yes, some will argue that if the Catholic Church was still the true Church, then these things would not occur. But throughout the history of the Catholic Church, we can see the hand of God in raising devout and holy souls to revitalize the Church and get her members back on track. Luther didn’t do that. He was not a saintly person who brought the sinful members back to repentance, despite the fact that he may have had good intentions.

 

[Denise1957]

Thanks, Denise,
And he should believe so. Lutherans, while wanting and desiring and praying for reciprocity from Rome in regards to receiving the validity of orders, it should not be for Lutherans the measuring stick as to whether or not our orders are valid. We know they are by divine law, and by the examples from the historic Church.
That’s not a knock at the Catholic Church, as we understand and respect your view, historically.

Just as I am not compelled to be our orders invalid because Rome says so, you should not, cannot, be expected to be moved to believe that ours are valid. It is the nature of our division, though one that I believe is not going to be a major stumbling block as we move closer.

Jon

Very reasonable, Jon. I expect Lutherans to believe that their church has a valid priesthood, and therefore a valid Mass and Eucharist. But I can’t believe that until my Church makes a definitive statement on the issue. Until then, it doesn’t do much good for some Lutherans (not you really, but others) to brush these issues aside. We should face reality. The divisions are real. It’s good to get to the source of the divisions, if possible.

 

[Tom_Baum]

False. There was never, and never will be, a corruption of doctrine as taught by the Church, and the Protestant revolt helped nothing good. “The Papacy” had NOT “somehow devised” a “sale of indulgences”. Such falsehood by Catholics shows the level of misunderstanding so often expressed here.

**The Protestant Reformation/ Indulgences
Question from Shane Brinegar on 11-06-2002: **
Many Protestant Theologians and Secular Historians say that the Church was corrupt during the time of the Reformation, and that it had fallen away from true Biblical Doctrines. They claim this is what lead Luther to Reform and his 95 theses. I have also read this in many church history books. Is the literature correct? Did Tetzel really preach, When the coin in the coffer rings the soul from purgatory springs. It sounds as though the church was using the sale of indulgences, as a way of taxation? Please Clarify. God Bless, Shane

**Answer by Fr. John Echert on 11-06-2002 (EWTN): **
No more true than for one who claims a few hundred years from now that during the time of the present sex scandal, the Church herself had fallen from her moral teaching on sexuality. Indulgences are a valid theological reality, and if in times past some abused the legitimate practice regarding these, that is a failure of members of the institutional aspect of the Church, not the Church herself, who remains always the spotless Bride of Christ. The analogy fits and is a reminder to Catholics to distinguish between the divinely appointed and guided Holy Church and the fallible human element within her. [My emphasis].
tinyurl.com/kg274px

As far as “No more true than for one who claims a few hundred years from now that during the time of the present sex scandal, the Church herself had fallen from her moral teaching on sexuality.” written as “Answer by Fr. John Echert on 11-06-2002 (EWTN):”

Are we the Church when we do no wrong and not the Church when we do wrong?

Jesus’s Church is people, His Church is not just a bunch of dogmas and doctrines and such.

Not only did “members”, officially I might add, of Jesus’s Church stray, to put it mildly, very mildly considering that there were quite a few people who basically had their lives destroyed, but also “higher-ups” who obstructed justice and spit in the face of God by doing some of the things that they did in covering up what was done.

It shouldn’t take anyone “a few hundred years” to stand up and speak the truth.

Who and/or what is the Church?

Jesus and dogma.

Jesus and doctrine.

Jesus and liturgy.

Jesus and sacraments.

Jesus and people.

Just who and or what do you or anyone else consider the Church?

Jesus never said that His Church would be perfect and never do wrong, however, He did say that His Church had a mission and that mission is that “the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against It”.

 

[spina1953]

In reading the history of the Middle Ages, it seems that the Catholic Church was in danger from the abuses that were and had been taking place for several decades if not longer by Priests, Bishops as well as some Popes. In 1463 Pope Pius II, addressing his cardinals, made the claim that they had not credit ( the Church ) that the Priesthood was an object of scorn, and that the people say we in the Church live in luxury, amass wealth, are slaves to ambition, ride on the fattest mules and the most spirited horses. The Pope also said that they, the cardinal, beneath their red hats, were often seen as proud officials whose cheeks were puffed up with pride.

Till the council of Trent, many of the abuses that were going on by officials of the Church, by that I mean priests, bishops, as well as those Popes who used their office to live a life of sin continued. However, the council of Trent did correct many of the abuses, but being said that does not mean that every priest, bishop and or official of the Church conformed, many continued in their abuses mostly in a hidden way as we see today with the sex abuses that have gone on by those who do them and think that somehow it is ok. This does not mean in any way shape or form that the doctrines are not being taught but that it is not the Church per say but those in the Church who abuse their authority. Also there were always those in the Church who tried to stop the abuses and change what needed to be changed.
This is something that Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli and others did not do but instead decided that the only way it could and should be corrected was to start their own churches with their own doctrines and authority. The Bible became the highest authority, not the catholic Church and everyone could by virtue read and interpret the Bible as they saw fit. This in turn led to a great many different interpretations as to what Scriptures said and what it meant which in turn led to chaos and misunderstandings and distortions of what Scripture said and meant. One can see that today in that there are so many different denominations each teaching their version of what they think Scripture says and means.

 

[Abu]

JonNC #173
if the failure of the members of the Church was the order of the day in a given area in the 1,500’s, and if the teaching of the day supported some of those failures, the it shouldn’t be surprising that some theologians would rise up against those failures, assuming them to be the teaching of the Church.

There was no “teaching” of the Church that was in error and never can be. The error of mixing the errors of individuals with the Magisterium is the cardinal error to which the confused and ignorant latch on.

Further, jettison the additional error that theologians are part of the Magisterium.

Tom Baum #176
Just who and or what do you or anyone else consider the Church?
Jesus never said that His Church would be perfect and never do wrong

How extraordinary for a Catholic to be so misinformed and unwilling to listen to the Magisterium! It’s not what anyone “considers”; it is what the Catholic Church teaches that needs to be known, understood and retained.

Here is Vatican II, Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church) #8:
‘This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, (12) which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd,(74) and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority,(75) which He erected for all ages as “the pillar and mainstay of the truth”.(76) This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.’
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

The Pope never apologises for the Church which is ‘held, as a matter of faith, to be unfailingly holy’ ” [Vatican II, *Lumen Gentium, art 39].Therefore Popes have apologised for the sins of Catholics, never for ‘the Church’

Real Catholics assent to all the doctrines of Christ’s Church, and take the trouble to learn Her teaching.