Augustine “Contra litteras Petiliana”, (Against the Letters of Petiliana) Bk.3, ch.6:
“If anyone preaches either concerning Christ or concerning His church or concerning any other matter which pertains to our faith and life; I will not say, if we, but what Paul adds, if an angel from heaven should preach to you anything besides what you have received in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospels, let him be anathema.”
“But in regard to those observances which we carefully attend and which the whole world keeps, and which derive not from Scripture BUT FROM TRADITION, we are given to understand that they are recommended and ordained to be kept either by the Apostles themselves or by plenary COUNCILS, THE AUTHORITY OF WHICH IS QUITE VITAL TO THE CHURCH.”
Letter of Augustine to Januarius 54,1,1, 400 A.D.
Of course Calvin did preach lies- the most horrific one was Calvin,s denial of the real presence (Transubstantiation) in the Eucharist.
In doing so he was NOT guided by the Holy Spirit,Calvin was was guided by the devil.
Every single early Church Father and Saint believed In the true presence.
The whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist was at the center of their lives.
There can only be one truth and one Holy Spirit that guides someone
There are three spirits, anyone one of which could be the one who is prompting a person.
1. There is first the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, and His prompting is from GOD.
2. Then there is the human spirit which manufactures the prompts through the imagination and other human traits.
3. Finally, there is the evil spirit and its prompting is straight from Satan.
Dear sister, do you actually believe that ALL the Saints and Early Church fathers were the ones being guided by their human spirit or an evil spirit regarding the true presence?
If you believe this , you have just elevated John Calvin as as Prophet above the lives of All the Saints.
Where do you find this Prophet John Calvin in the Bible -:)
John Calvin was merely a man who read the Bible and understood it and commented upon it, by the will of God. Calvin took Matthew 23:9 to his heart -- "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
He knelt to none but Christ.
"So Calvin was persuaded to stay and he began to preach in Geneva. Not long after this the Roman Catholic priests of the nearby city of Lausanne were challenged to a public debate by the Reformers. Of 337 priests only 174 arrived and only 4 had any ability to defend their doctrine. Farel and Viret, a foremost Swiss Reformer of those times, were the spokesmen for the Bible. They took Calvin with them as an observer as he had no experience of these debates. The debate went on for several days. One priest in defence of transubstantiation started to quote from the Early Church Fathers. Farel and Viret were unable to handle this and looked to Calvin for help. Standing up, the (Calvin) proceeded to quote from memory passages from the Early Church Fathers, giving the exact source in each case. It was an amazing display of learning and had an electrifying effect on the assembly. The opposition was completely confounded. One priest was converted immediately. As a result of this astonishing performance not only did Lausanne turn Protestant but 200 priests renounced the Roman Catholic Church."
Pity you and I weren't there.
Regardless, "early church fathers" are not Scripture, and Scripture is what determines our (and Calvin's) understanding of the Lord's Supper. I like this Q & A from the Orthodox Presbyterian Church website...
So, in the final analysis it is not possible to arrive at final answers by going back to the "church fathers." It is interesting to do this. But final answers can only be found in the inspired foundational writings of the apostles and prophets. In this way, alone, can we really decide which views are really in accord with the Scriptures.""Jesus promised to lead his church into all truth (John 16:13). But it is clear, from the entire history of the Church, that this was accomplished through a process of study, controversy, and trial. The results of this process have been the great creeds and confessions of the church, such as the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed (these three are often called the Ecumenical Creeds of early church history) and such Reformation creeds as the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the Westminster Standards. These later creeds were an urgently needed answer to the growing body of doctrines in the Roman Catholic Church that were not in line with the Bible as the early ecumenical creeds were.
The reply then goes on to cite the Westminster Confession's declaration of what constitutes the Lord's Supper which I think is 100% Scriptural and sound.
For emphasis, please read the remarks of Calvin's brave student, John Knox, which further explain how the Roman mass errs in presuming to continually offer a sacrifice to God that has already been performed, accomplished and accepted by God, once for all the sins of His flock.
Disobedience to God's voice is not only when man does wickedly contrary to the precepts of God, but also when of good zeal, or good intent (as we commonly speak), man does anything to the honour or service of God not commanded by the express word of God... I know you will say, it is no other sacrifice, but the selfsame, save that it is iterated [repeated] and renewed. But the words of Paul bind you more straightly than that so you may escape. For in his whole disputation, he contends not only that there is no other sacrifice for sin, but also that the selfsame sacrifice, once offered, is sufficient, and never may be offered again. For otherwise of no greater price, value, nor extenuation, should the death of Christ be, than the death of those beasts which were offered under the law which are proved to be of none effect, nor strength, because it behooved them often times to be iterated. The apostle, by comparing Jesus Christ to the Levitical priests, and his sacrifice unto theirs, makes the matter plain that Christ might be offered but once. First, the Levitical priests were mortal, and therefore it behooved them to have successors; but Christ is an eternal priest, and therefore is alone, and needs no successor. The Levitical priests offered the blood of beasts; but Jesus Christ offered his own body and blood. The Levitical priests, for impotence of their sacrifice, did iterate the same; but the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, having in itself all perfection, needs not to be iterated. Yea, to affirm that it ought (or may be) iterated, is extreme blasphemy; for that were to impute imperfection thereupon, contrary to the whole religion, and the plain words of Paul, saying, "Such is our High Priest, holy, just, unpolluted, separate from sinners, and higher than the heavens; to whom it is not necessary every day to offer, as did those priests first offer for their own sins, and then for the sins of the people: for that he hath done once, when he offered himself" (Heb. 7:26-27). What words can be more plain? Here Paul shows all causes, wherefore it needs not Christ to be offered again; and would conclude, that he may not be offered again...""...The Mass is Idolatry. All worshipping, honouring, or service invented by the brain of man in the religion of God, without his own express commandment, is idolatry. The Mass is invented by the brain of man, without any commandment of God; therefore it is idolatry...
Knox continues, every word Bible-based and true.