Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/01/2010 10:50:29 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; markomalley; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 07/01/2010 10:51:14 AM PDT by NYer ("God dwells in our midst, in the Blessed Sacrament of the altar." St. Maximilian Kolbe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

“Each of these Catholic Reformers retained the unity of Christ’s Church, submitted to church leadership, and patiently brought about renewal”

Hypothetical: Would it be possible for the Roman Catholic Church to reach such a level of corruption that it was cut off or discarded by God?


3 posted on 07/01/2010 10:56:28 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

Bookmark.


8 posted on 07/01/2010 11:59:19 AM PDT by Sergio (If a tree fell on a mime in the forest, would he make a sound?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
Luther would not tolerate any authority that failed to support him immediately and without question.

Really? That's a bit hyperbolic. At the Diet of Worms, he said, "Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (..), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen."

Martin Luther was a flawed man, as are we all. All of the characters in this story are from a time long ago. But to condemn Luther because he didn't wallow in pig sh## while absolving his supposed betters of their arrogance is plain silly.

Stating that Martin Luther burned the Papal bull, while ignoring that Martin Luther's works were burned first. I'm not saying that Martin Luther was justified in burning the bull, just noting the double standard. Arrogance in the Catholic Church is accepted, expected, and justified.

Stating that Martin Luther was arrogant, while ignoring the fact that those at the Diet of Worms treated Martin Luther as a deviant child, ignored any attempt at reason, and gave anyone the legal right to kill Martin Luther without recourse.

My main problem with this whole article is the same as my problem with the Catholic Church. People at the top can be arrogant (even when they're wrong), but people on the bottom are to be subservient. The Catholic Church stinks of man's desire to have power over other men. It stinks of abuse of power. It stinks of the attitude that lower men should know their place.

The point of this article seems to be that reformers in the Catholic Church should tread carefully because those higher up in the church are arrogant and have a right to demand blind devotion without question or thought. I saw no regret or complaint about the structure of the Catholic Church, just an acceptance of elitism. Maybe that's why people kiss the pope's ring while he sits on an earthy throne: it makes sense them in their world view.

12 posted on 07/01/2010 12:39:33 PM PDT by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

Protestants didn’t “reform,” they rebelled, or revolted.


18 posted on 07/01/2010 5:58:23 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (I don't speak starbucks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

I would add that, perhaps, at best, the term “reform” can loosely apply to Luther in his earlier years. A reformer, however, would not call the Pope anti-Christ or desecrate monasteries. These were acts of someone who lost his faith and not a reformer.

What went on from then on in Protestantism had nothing to do with reform altogether.


19 posted on 07/01/2010 7:54:16 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
History shows that God does not use "hot-heads" to guide His Church into righteousness.

Obviously this was written for Catholics who don't read anything non Catholic...

Looking around the world, it's readily apparent that God used Martin Luther to the fullest, all across the earth...

And by reading the last of your sentence, God clearly chose someone who actually believed what He said...God is not leading His church into righteousness...He is not leading your Church into righteousness...Your religion is trying to lead it's members into it's own perception of righteousness...

We as Christians are righteous already...Have been since the day we accepted Jesus Christ as our Savior...

God revealed this truth to Martin Luther when Martin succumbed to God's written words and made them available to the masses...

23 posted on 07/02/2010 4:20:17 AM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
As I read the comments and the article, I can see the main division, which has to do with the definition of “church.” As long as the Roman Catholic Church sees herself as “the church,” rather than as a part of the church, I do not see how there can be any reconciliation between Rome and Christians of other denominations. The second problem occurs that whenever the Scriptures talk about the church or churches, the Roman Catholics assume that the Scriptures are referring to the Roman Catholic Church, and non-Roman Catholics understand it as referring to those that believe that Jesus Christ is Lord. There is no use talking about authority within the church, if there is no agreement on the essence (esse) of the church.
35 posted on 07/06/2010 3:33:56 PM PDT by Nosterrex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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