M
MelanieAnne
Guest
I question the premise of the question. How do we know God “allowed” Protestantism? Maybe it’s just that people have free will and starting Protestant faiths was what they chose to do.
- Status
V
vocatio
Guest
that’s the way you see things. God never wants us to leave Him or His Church… but does God always get waht he wants? Not when it comes to human beings… :banghead: :hypno: but he knows we will leave him/ do terrible things because we are ignorant & selfish (etc) and he also ***knows what any given person needs to go through to find Him… ***
I thought you disagreed??
You are confusing me. What’s going on …really? You seem to have extracted meaning that isn’t there.
J
Julious
Guest
Hi all, I think it is a very vast topic to discuss. I don’t have any idea what to say. Just want to say Happy New year to all and may God bless you!!!
L
LeroyCRHP
Guest
Don’t confuse friendly with lax, and don’t confuse our beautiful faith and mass as not “Godly”
T
Truthstalker
Guest
This link is to a letter Pope Hadrian VI, successor to Leo X, wrote concerning the causes of the Lutheran movement. Hadrian’s letter is #558 if I remember correctly.
books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC02338418&id=oEy_3aDT61sC&pg=PA141&dq=%22%09Luther%27s+Correspondence+and+Other+Contemporary+Letters%22#PPA141,M1
I thought it was interesting. He discusses Luther and corruption in the Church and the need for reform.
The article on him in the Catholic encyclopaedia is also of interest. Those who are interested in more than a spitting contest should read these things.
books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC02338418&id=oEy_3aDT61sC&pg=PA141&dq=%22%09Luther%27s+Correspondence+and+Other+Contemporary+Letters%22#PPA141,M1
I thought it was interesting. He discusses Luther and corruption in the Church and the need for reform.
The article on him in the Catholic encyclopaedia is also of interest. Those who are interested in more than a spitting contest should read these things.
T
Truthstalker
Guest
Let’s see…
1517 Luther posted the 95 theses
1519 Leipzig debate with Eck
1520 The bull Exsurge Domine
1525 Luther married
Dates are from Roland Bainton’s Here I Stand A Life of Martin Luther
You can hardly claim he married “at once.” He said for a long time that he would never marry.
You display profound ignorance of the facts of the matter. If we cannot believe you in those things that are easily checked, why should we believe you in things that can be determined only with more difficulty, let alone those things that require faith?
E
eelpis
Guest
God has not allowed Protestantism, it’s a heresy and error has no rights.
God ‘allows the Protestants’ but he wants everyone to come to the knowledge of the truth.
God gave us free will, that’s why.
God ‘allows the Protestants’ but he wants everyone to come to the knowledge of the truth.
God gave us free will, that’s why.
S
sambos671
Guest
Has no rights? What? Its ok to view Catholicism as the only truth but to say no one else has rights? Phah! Nonsense. This kind of thinking led to inappropiate actions that occured in the middle ages. The RCC can no longer be looked at as a Feudal Lord over the lands. Kings are no longer are crowned by the Pope like Charlemagne. And if you’re an american, you have rights no matter what you believe. If you want to take away peoples rights become muslim they will be happy to oblige.
D
Dispector
Guest
I’m not sure what type of “rights” he was talking about. In a political sense you are absolutely correct (1st Amendment). However, in a religious sense Protestants are not allowed to fulfill Sacramental gifts.
Regarding the OP… God allows Protestantism because God allows people to make errors. The ability to make errors is what allows us to have freewill.
S
sambos671
Guest
Ok I can go with that. Most protestants I know don’t believe in the Sacraments anyway. Most don’t believe the things do the thing they represent ie the Sacraments. They believe in Ordenances which I find strange why such an emphasis on symbolism in the NT then? And your last statement I can humbly accept.
T
Truthstalker
Guest
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
First, the claim that Protestants are not allowed what I guess you mean to say are the sacraments. Protestants baptize and marry - both of which are recognized by the Catholic Church.
Secondly, logically we had free will before we could make errors. And free will applies to things that are indifferent: it is not a matter of sin, usually, as to whether I wear this or that pair of socks today. Free will applied to perfect man. In Catholic theology the immaculate Virgin had free will yet did not sin.
If you will agree that God allows Catholicism for the same reason that He allows Protestantism, that is, that we are fallen, I could go along with you. Your post smacks of the all-too common worship of free will at the expense of the sovereignty of God, an error now promulgated by the Catholic Church, although not a part of its official teaching.
T
Truthstalker
Guest
I am not sure what you mean by this. Most Protestants accept baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although some, such as the Salvation Army, reject them. What do you mean by your second sentence?
E
eelpis
Guest
I said that error (in this case Protestantism) has no rights, people do have rights (in this case Protestants), but also obligations. And God has rights too, for example to be worshipped in the way he wants aka holy sacrifice of the mass.
S
sambos671
Guest
Most protestants don’t believe that baptism saves you that it is a symbol of salvation and an ordenance but not necissary to gain salvation or justification. Belief is what saves. Not the act of Baptism. Marriage is a contract a covenant between two people and that breaking it is breaking a vow. The Lord’s supper is viewed as a symbol of what Christ did on the Cross. Which is why “do this in rememberance of me” is emphasised. The last sentence means that I accept that God allowed the reformation to accure because of Man’s ability to make mistakes. Whether it was the mistakes by the Roman Catholic clergy and power brokers in Europe or the self interest of some of the reformers. Though on a whole I believe the reformation was a natural consequence of corruption and the ability of the masses to read scritpure for themselves. Now that they could actually afford scripture instead of paying a year’s wages for a nobleman.
S
sambos671
Guest
This makes no sense to me. Well, the first part of your statement. Your last statement I would say God should be worship in the way he wants. As far as his having rights I will have to think about what that means since all rights come from him. He is the first mover. So I’m not certain he can be defined by what rights he has.I said that error (in this case Protestantism) has no rights, people do have rights (in this case Protestants), but also obligations. And God has rights too, for example to be worshipped in the way he wants aka holy sacrifice of the mass.
D
Dispector
Guest
You are correct there. I should have quantified that by specifically mentioning Confession, Holy Orders, Confirmation, Eucharist, Last Rites, and other Holy Order functions.
Free will applies to issues of morality and indifferent issues alike. However, the one relevant to the discussion is one of morality. If one is incapable to choosing to act sinfully then can they truly be said to act good? In order to have free will we must all have the ability to act sinfully or not. Otherwise, free will is impossible. Free will is just as the name implies, you are free to act as you will.
The only reason we have Catholicism is because we are fallen. But, I’m not understanding the last part of your argument regarding the “worship of free will at the expense of the sovereignty of God”. Can you clarify this for me? Thank you.
C
catharina
Guest
Sure I can claim he married at once. He was excommunicated in 1521, he married in 1525. Shall I say he married quickly? Shall I say he married in deifance of his commintments to Holy Orders? Shall I say he never married at all? He married at once - from my perspective. I’m 63 yrs old; four years after his excommunication seems to me to be “at once.”
D
Dispector
Guest
Well, he certainly wasn’t waiting around feeling remorseful about the issue… that’s for sure.
C
catharina
Guest
Thanks - and that’s my point.
T
Truthstalker
Guest
“at once” has a definite meaning. Few would equate fours years with “at once.” But words mean whatever you say they mean, apparently. You can claim the moon is made out of green cheese, and then bring in your own definition of what green cheese is.
The point is that you have taken the worst possible construction on Luther’s actions, one not sustained by historical investigation, one not in line with the Lord’s commandments to love our brethren, but one that is all too common among Catholics, who likewise take his commandments as meaning whatever they want them to mean.
You then take that interpretation and build your case around a fallacy.
You cannot see into his heart. You cannot know his fate. You cannot judge him, yet you do.
- Status