Posted on 10/28/2019 6:45:02 AM PDT by Gamecock
Five hundred years ago, the church in Western Europe was awash with cultural and scholarly forces that called for much-needed reform. Most of these forces flowed from the Renaissance, whose Christian scholars were weighing the contemporary church against what they found in the Bible and the writings of the early church fathers. The greatest of these scholars was Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, who had in 1516 published a new critical edition of the Greek New Testament. It rapidly became a tool in the hands of reformers of all sorts. Prior to this, Erasmus had published new editions of many of the treatises of the church fathers and writings of his own critiquing contemporary Christianity in the name of a more biblical and more patristic faith. We cannot, for example, read Erasmus’ popular Handbook of the Militant Christian (1503) without seeing in it a vision of a reformed Christianity that trembles on the very verge of what we might call Protestant.
In the end, it fell not to Erasmus but to Martin Luther to catalyze these existing influences into an effective reform movement. Luther, a pastor-scholar of the Augustinian order of friars at the University of Wittenberg, had discovered in his own religious order the resources of an Augustinian theology of grace that he wanted to apply to the wider church. The prevailing theology taught in the Roman Catholic universities at that time (the so-called via moderna, or “modern way”) was anti-Augustinian, in that it placed all the emphasis on human free will and merit in securing salvation. To Luther, this was a doctrinal and pastoral disaster.
Traditionally, the start of the Reformation has been dated to Luther’s public protest on October 31, 1517, in his Ninety-Five Theses against the sale of indulgences. Simplifying a complex issue, indulgences were certificates of pardon authorized by the papacy that, it was thought, could shorten the time suffered in purgatory by the buyer or his deceased relatives. Although indulgences continue to be offered by the Roman church, it would be very hard to find even the most die-hard Roman Catholic who would now defend the horribly emotionally manipulative “indulgence preaching” of the Dominican friar Johann Tetzel, with his tasteless reassurances that anyone buying one of his indulgences would find mercy from God even if he had defiled the Virgin Mary. Only a degree less vulgar was Tetzel’s jingle “As soon as the coin in the money-box rings, a soul from purgatory springs!”
Had Luther’s protest against this monstrosity—initially made as a “Catholic reformer”—been better handled by the papacy, a very different story might have unfolded. We might all be praying to St. Martin Luther, patron of Roman Catholic reform. But Pope Leo X overreacted badly to Luther’s protest, bungled the whole affair, and succeeded in driving Luther, step by step, into an increasingly polemical stance, ultimately involving the basic issue of authority. By the time Luther stood as an accused heretic before the diet, or imperial assembly, at Worms in January 1521, he had rejected the supreme authority of the papacy within the church, affirming instead that Scripture possessed sole infallible authority for Christians. Later theologians would call this the “formal cause” of the Reformation: that which gives form, structure, and sense to Reformation teaching.
Although it did not figure at the Diet of Worms, a second principle—the “material cause” of the Reformation—soon became entangled with Luther’s movement for reform. This was justification by faith alone. When Luther and his fellow Reformers turned to Scripture as the church’s sole infallible authority, they found in its pages the teaching that sinners are justified (accepted as righteous by God) through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. This was the gospel of the Reformation. Historians argue about when precisely Luther came to believe this; some place it as early as 1514, while others suggest a later date of 1519 (my preferred option). We do not find justification by faith in the Ninety-Five Theses, but we do find it in Luther’s watershed 1520 treatise On the Freedom of a Christian, where he expounds the doctrine with a lyrical, joyful eloquence.
Armed with these two principles—the sole infallible authority of Scripture and justification by faith alone in Christ alone—Reformers all over Europe cast off the dead weight of papal authority and reformed their existing churches, sometimes at the city level, as in Calvin’s Geneva, and sometimes at the national level, as in Scotland under John Knox. This Reformation embraced not only theological teaching but also congregational worship and church government, which were reshaped to reflect the reality and implications of biblical authority and justification by faith. By the time the dust had settled, Europe found itself divided into a powerfully Protestant north and a reactionary Roman Catholic south, with some countries (notably France, Switzerland, and the Netherlands) internally divided.
In these ecumenical days, many lament this division. The present writer, however, sees it as a necessary consequence of the tragic rejection by southern Europe of the liberating and life-giving truth welcomed by the north. England, Scotland, Germany, the Dutch Republic, the whole of Scandinavia (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland), and the Protestant portions of France and Switzerland were to enjoy a new and illustrious history as lands where the gospel was most fully known and most purely productive of moral, spiritual, and literary fruit. The Reformation is not something to be lamented but celebrated—and emulated.
The Inquisition will be on this thread in 3 .... 2 .... 1 ....
I learned recently that descartes was a follower of servetus.
This has changed my worldview of who was most important during the reformation.
Now I would argue that it was servetus
Why the reformation? The invention of the printing press is the answer.
And why is Christianity (and all beliefs, even scientific) going through another clensing/purification? The answer is the internet and search engines. It is like the printing press on steroids.
When people can freely share thoughts and ideas and discuss, them openly, baloney quickly gets destroyed. It’s why I no longer believe in Eternal Conscious Torment for non believers. I now am an annihilationist.
But during most of my life as a Christian, the annihilationist viewpoint was simply discarded out of hand by the “mature” Christians I respected. But when given a chance to study, they were unable to answer my objections, whereas annihilationists answer their objections simply and easily, using scripture.
This is an example of evidence for my belief that, “on the internet, the truth percolates to the top.” It’s because when all sides are given equal light and opportunity to make their case, the truth wins. And this is the great strength of the internet.
It’s why Dan Rather lost his job.
the growing impulse of individualism and personal independence (independent personal judgment) in the culture helped lead to Luther’s rebellion
“Armed with the sole infallible authority of Scripture and justification by faith alone in Christ alone, Reformers all over Europe reformed their existing churches. “
This has lead to the confusion of churches under the heading of Protestantism.
Today, a secular, agnostic and anti-Christian spirit dominates these countries.
On a positive note, the greatest growth of the church today is in South America, Africa and Asia among evangelical, Pentecostal and Charismatic churches - all of which are fruit of the Reformation.
Now, this is interesting!
Someone who believes in multiple mormon gods, including a "Heavenly Mother" - and perhaps even believes he himself may become a god - is stating that other churches that follow the Scriptures are confused??
Talk about confusion!!
instead of the confusion of error taught with absolute authority by the Roman church... I’ll take it. Besides poll any number of Protestants and you will find very little disagreement on issues of salvation. The rest is style points
That is not always the case.
As an example, your newfound annihilationism is, indeed, false.
If a soul were simply annihilated at the end of his life (or at the Judgment, or whenever), then God is not respecting that soul's choices or his free will.
Don't forget that we are made in His image--that image being the soul. If the soul is destroyed, then God would be destroying part of Himself. That is not going to happen.
Also, then what is the point of Eternal Life? If we were just annihilated, then there really is no penalty for unbelief. Why wouldn't God have just created the souls that would "choose" Him?
Sorry--logic just does not support that belief.
Also, most people (99% or more) will see conflicting ideas/opinions/etc, and just choose the one that makes them feel better. Truth has nothing to do with it.
I will add this to my previous post—Free thoughts and ideas being bantered about can be a good idea. However, some ideas are just so bad that they should not be given any credence.
Also, most people (99% or more) will see conflicting ideas/opinions/etc, and just choose the one that makes them feel better. Truth has nothing to do with it.
But yes, the old phrase about leading a horse to water definitely applies.
What are the issues of salvation?
Single source inatead of many sources in Protestantism.
salvation by grace alone through faith alone in the finished work of Jesus Christ. Belief in the triune God Father Son and Holy Ghost. The inerrancy of scripture and the recognition of scripture as final authority in all matters of faith. The virgin birth and diety of Jesus Christ and His nature of True God and True Man. The atoning death of Christ for our sin and His physical resurrection. The eternal and unchanging existence of God, father son and Holy Spirit. I’m sure I am missing some but this is a quick list to get started.
which is single source? Mainstream mormonism? The FLDS and other splinter groups? The jack Mormons?
Thank you.
What are some of the minor disagreements that do not matter thar you speak of?
“other splinter groups?”
Just more refermation groups, Just like other protestants.
“Reformers all over Europe cast off the dead weight of papal authority and reformed their existing churches, sometimes at the city level, as in Calvin’s Geneva, and sometimes at the national level, as in Scotland under John Knox.”
Here’s a little trivia: the first officially Protestant country was formed when the Grand Master of the Teutonic Knights, a Catholic crusader order, converted to Lutheranism and made an agreement with his uncle, the King of Poland, to convert the Order’s lands to a hereditary duchy, which became Protestant Prussia, in 1525.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.