Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: RnMomof7; HarleyD; Dr. Eckleburg
Hi to each of you.

How's the weather, Mom? Not too bad here, but could get ugly later. I love snowstorms!!!!

Ok, here's the real reason I'm writing. I read the entire link that Dr. E provided regarding the Martyrs of the Reformation. I was hesitant about posting this because I didn't and don't want to sidetrack the thread, but I think that's already happened, no?

Anyway, I have some questions. If these questions have already been addressed, and you'd rather not go there, then, if you could point me in the direction of a thread that has already covered this, that would be good too.

That link that laid out the stories of the Martyrs was interesting for many reasons. I have always held the Martyrs for the Faith in especially high esteem, and I was very moved by the accounts therein. If you ever get the chance to read about St. Jean de Brebeuf, it will move you, too. He's a Catholic North American Martyr whose life and death is astounding. And, let us not forget that contemporary Martyr, the young lady at Columbine, whose name, I'm sorry to say, I don't know, but I think of her too now and again.

Anyway, here are the questions:

1)Hasn't there been some indication for some time, per even Protestant historians, that Foxe's account may contain embellishment? Not that I'm implying, even if true, that it would render it without substance and meaning, just want to get your take on that.

2)The most important question for last: Why were the Reformers so viscerally contra the Real Presence? Per that link, they seem to despise it, and that seems so over-the-top.

Even if they believed it to be untrue, why did they despise the doctrine so? Their arguments, per Scripture, I don't find that convincing. What I did find convincing was the idea that they promulgated which stated that the Doctrine of the Real Presence was used as a gateway to who was considered a real Christian and who was not. Am I understanding that correctly insofar as the Reformers views are concerned?

227 posted on 01/25/2006 4:50:21 PM PST by AlbionGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies ]


To: AlbionGirl; RnMomof7; Dr. Eckleburg
Hi AlbionGirl

Point 1-If I remember correctly Foxe's Book of Martyrs has been criticized by others as containing embellishments. I don't know if this is true or not as I'm not familiar with the book. However we can't and shouldn't throw out the book as suspect. If we did that with every book based upon bias we might as well throw out 99% of all Church/church writings and teachings. (e.g. Would you say the Church official records are not bias against the Reformation?) As with all documents such as this you must simply view it as a source. How much weight you wish to give it is entirely up to you but I have always felt it was folly to ignore anything unless clearly proved to be false. There is generally always some truth if nothing more than simply another perspective.

Point 2-It is my contention that the Reformers were not "viscerally contra the Real Presence". I believe there is a historical paper trail within the Church that shows some who believed in the bread and wine as a symbol rather than a real presence. The Eucharist was officially recognized at the 4th Lateran Council of 1211. It's my belief that the Eucharist was one method used by the medieval Catholic Church for attracting and keeping the populists. You must refill God's grace in your life. This erroneous and abused belief drove the Reformers (certainly Wycliffe) to adopt the consubstantiation belief but not without cause. There is probably more scriptural text against the Real Presence than for and there is nothing in scripture that indicates the wine and bread actually turns into the physical blood and body of Christ. With all due respects for the holy sacrament, it only proclaims the Lord's death and resurrection until He comes. There is nothing to suggest it fills us with anything.

It should be noted many Catholics, of course, vemousnessly disagree with everything I have written. I suppose it goes back to my point in #1. :O)

228 posted on 01/25/2006 5:42:47 PM PST by HarleyD (Man's steps are ordained by the LORD, How then can man understand his way? - Pro 20:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies ]

To: AlbionGirl; HarleyD; RnMomof7
Hi, AG. Stay warm through the snow.

The most important question for last: Why were the Reformers so viscerally contra the Real Presence? Per that link, they seem to despise it, and that seems so over-the-top.

I think what you're perceiving is accurate. Among Protestants, especially the Reformed, there is an almost tactile disdain for all things mystical. This is one reason I admire Reformed doctrine. It is the antithesis of "hidden" wisdom. As you've noted, the Reformed very nearly "despise" anything that suggests of an esoteric nature within man himself. Man is a fallen, sinning creature. Redeemed men are children of God. But that is due solely to and absolutely by the death of Christ on the cross who paid the price for our sins and acquitted us of our guilt.

Nothing hidden. Nothing uncertain. And most of all, nothing transmogrifying. Mystical transformation is for alchemists. Men begin as human beings; men die as human beings. But by Christ's atonement, we will see heaven. Scripture gives us this promise. Christ Himself gave us this promise. He will lose none whom God has given Him to redeem.

So Protestants do not like the ambiguity of the RC and EO. It appears manipulative to us. It appears extraneous to the completed work of Christ. It appears to be excess baggage, ribbons and bows and beads, all obscuring our finished redemption by Christ.

Our redemption is not ongoing. Our sanctification is ongoing and continues as long as we live. But our sins were paid-in-full at Calvary. Salvation has been accomplished by God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone.

There's a scene in the movie "Cromwell" with Richard Harris. Cromwell (who had his own problems along the way) enters church one Sunday morning with his family and is shocked to find the table of the Lord's Supper turned away from the congregation. In Protestant churches, the table and minister face the congregation.

When Cromwell sees this apparent return to RC tradition, he explodes and flings the table around in a fit of righteous fury.

It's a very interesting scene that appeals to Protestants. We tend to be allergic to the pomp and dislike the distance between God and man that we believe is created by top-heavy hierarchies.

Salvation is so much simpler than many would have it. Believe and be saved.

"Seeing that a Pilot steers the ship in which we sail, who will never allow us to perish even in the midst of shipwrecks, there is no reason why our minds should be overwhelmed with fear and overcome with weariness." -- John Calvin

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -- John 16:33

230 posted on 01/25/2006 9:32:18 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (an ambassador in bonds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson