Posted on 05/31/2025 4:31:09 AM PDT by vespa300
“If you had a history ... “
What’s this “you” sh!t, Kimosabe? Did I not say I’m not a Protestant? (Although I recently started attending a Protestant — Presbyterian — church.)
Martin Luther and the 95 Theses IS Protestant history.
Not by far "everything" you like in the case of the one true cult promoter versus any ( "one true church" promoters being included) who do not uphold mandated 7th day sabbath keeping. See https://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/search/label/Seventh%20Day%20Adventism, by the grace of God.
The Proper Observance Of The Lord’s Day “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” — Exod. 20:8...The particular day made obligatory upon the Jews is not binding upon us, but God has led his people in the choice of a day, ...Those who make of the Lord’s day a day of pleasure, in the pursuit of which they probably put more energy than they do in a day of toil, are not keeping it to their physical welfare. https://www.lutheranlibrary.org/a9-the-proper-observance-of-the-lords-day-the-small-catechism
That is simply ignorance, despite being abundantly shown* otherwise. As often shown,m it is distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly God-inspired, substantive, authoritative record of what the NT church believed the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, and with Acts through Revelation especially revealing how the NT church understood the gospels).
As for history, corruption and divisions (not the first time) among popes and pastors and prelates, to who the flock were to look to and submit, called for and preceded the Reformation:
• Maurice W. Sheehan: In this lecture I want to talk about the causes of the Reformation. This is a rather standard approach to the Reformation because it is admitted by all that the Reformation did not just happen or come like a bolt from the blue...Part of the tragedy of the Reformation is that the Church before 1517 was unable to reform itself or to set in motion events or changes that would have led to a reform in the Church that would have satisfied its members and really affected change....
It is possible to go back deep into the Middle Ages when enumerating or toting up the causes of the Reformation. I would like to start simply with the fourteenth century.... The first thing to note is that in the fourteenth century there was a period of approximately seventy years, from 1309 to 1377, when the pope was not living or residing in Rome... To...Boniface IX, goes the unenviable distinction of probably having begun the papal sale of offices....Sixtus IV was completely a worldling....His successor Innocent VIII had an illegitimate family. Alexander VI, who was Spanish, was perhaps the worst of them all. He had many illegitimate children,
And if we go to the clergy, to what we can call the lower clergy or the ordinary priests, we can say that one vice that many of them had was immorality. Many of them had women that they kept in their rectories by whom they had children, so they had families to support. — Maurice W. Sheehan, O.F.M. Cap., Lecture 2: Prelude-Causes, Attempts at Reform to 1537; International Catholic University, http://home.comcast.net/~icuweb/c01802.htm
• Catholic historian Paul Johnson additionally described the existing social situation among the clergy during this period leading up to the Refomation:
“Probably as many as half the men in orders had ‘wives’ and families. Behind all the New Learning and the theological debates, clerical celibacy was, in its own way, the biggest single issue at the Reformation. It was a great social problem and, other factors being equal, it tended to tip the balance in favour of reform. As a rule, the only hope for a child of a priest was to go into the Church himself, thus unwillingly or with no great enthusiasm, taking vows which he might subsequently regret: the evil tended to perpetuate itself.” (History of Christianity, pgs 269-270)
•Cardinal Ratzinger observed,
"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution.“
"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” trans. by Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989) p.196).
• Catholic Encyclopedia>Council of Constance:
“The Western Schism was thus at an end, after nearly forty years of disastrous life; one pope (Gregory XII) had voluntarily abdicated; another (John XXIII) had been suspended and then deposed, but had submitted in canonical form; the third claimant (Benedict XIII) was cut off from the body of the Church, "a pope without a Church, a shepherd without a flock" (Hergenröther-Kirsch). It had come about that, whichever of the three claimants of the papacy was the legitimate successor of Peter, there reigned throughout the Church a universal uncertainty and an intolerable confusion, so that saints and scholars and upright souls were to be found in all three obediences. On the principle that a doubtful pope is no pope, the Apostolic See appeared really vacant, and under the circumstances could not possibly be otherwise filled than by the action of a general council.” (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04288a.htm)
• Jaroslav Pelikan (Lutheran, later Eastern Orhodox), The Riddle of Roman Catholicism (New York: Abingdon Press, 1959), also found:
"Recent research on the Reformation entitles us to sharpen it and say that the Reformation began because the reformers were too catholic in the midst of a church that had forgotten its catholicity..."
“The reformers were catholic because they were spokesmen for an evangelical tradition in medieval catholicism, what Luther called "the succession of the faithful." The fountainhead of that tradition was Augustine (d. 430). His complex and far-reaching system of thought incorporated the catholic ideal of identity plus universality, and by its emphasis upon sin and grace it became the ancestor of Reformation theology. … All the reformers relied heavily upon Augustine. They pitted his evangelical theology against the authority of later church fathers and scholastics, and they used him to prove that they were not introducing novelties into the church, but defending the true faith of the church.”
“...To prepare books like the Magdeburg Centuries they combed the libraries and came up with a remarkable catalogue of protesting catholics and evangelical catholics, all to lend support to the insistence that the Protestant position was, in the best sense, a catholic position.
Additional support for this insistence comes from the attitude of the reformers toward the creeds and dogmas of the ancient catholic church. The reformers retained and cherished the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of the two natures in Christ which had developed in the first five centuries of the church….”
“If we keep in mind how variegated medieval catholicism was, the legitimacy of the reformers' claim to catholicity becomes clear. (Pelikan, pp. 46-47)
"Substantiation for this understanding of the gospel came principally from the Scriptures, but whenever they could, the reformers also quoted the fathers of the catholic church. There was more to quote than their Roman opponents found comfortable." (Pelikan 48-49).
However, Scripture, tradition and history can only assuredly consist of and mean what Rome may say they do, and which is the real basis for the veracity of Rome for a RC. Thus no less than Cardinal Manning stated,
• "It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine....The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour." — Most Rev. Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, pp. 227,28
And which means that the basis for the veracity of church teaching does not rest upon Scriptural warrant, but upon the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, which is unseen and unnecessary in Scripture.
*
To Texas_Guy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3846989/posts?page=68#68 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3846989/posts?page=67#67 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3868037/posts?page=23#23 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3867413/posts?page=78#78 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=50#50 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=49#49 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=48#48 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=47#47 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=60#60 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3872796/posts?page=46#46 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=97#97 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=93#93 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=92#92 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3872796/posts?page=506#506 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3877970/posts?page=138#138 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=89#89 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=88#88 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=87#87 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=86#86 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4044225/posts?page=29#29 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4064985/posts?page=35#35 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=22#22 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=24#24 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4099941/posts?page=70#70 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4102860/posts?page=142#142 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=24#24 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4099941/posts?page=70#70
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4162325/posts?page=95#95 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4119008/posts?page=51#51 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4138561/posts?page=28#28 https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4138561/posts?page=31#31
Ellen White was a notorius liar who has suckered millions of wingnuts.
The Church into which Menno “withdrew” (to his credit, Menno rejected the warmongering nature of his fellow Anabaptists, thus founding the Mennonites):
During February 1534, the power of the Anabaptists in Münster increased dramatically. On February 8, Jan Bockelszoon van Leiden and the guild leader Bernard Knipperdolling, whom Bockelszoon had befriended, ran wildly through the streets, screaming that everyone must repent of their sins. This ignited much emotional turbulence, especially among the women Anabaptists, who, as former nuns,had recently left the convents and fallen under the influence of Rothmann’s preaching. Some began to see apocalyptic visions in the streets of such intensity that they would foam at the mouth and throw themselves upon the ground . In such a charged atmosphere, the Anabaptists made their first armed rising and took the Town Hall and market place. The Lutheran majority in the town offered little resistance, and soon the town council recognized the Anabaptists as legal citizens of Münster. Thereafter, many Lutherans fled the city and the Anabaptists grew in number and power. Messengers and manifestos were sent out urging Anabaptists in other towns to come with their families to Münster. The rest of the earth, it was announced, was to be destroyed, but Münster would be spared to become the New Jerusalem.Into this volatile situation Jan Matthys entered: a tall, gaunt figure with a long black beard. His imposing, physical presence allowed him to gain power quickly, but the attempt to realize the New Jerusalem was not without authoritarian measures. Unlike Hoffman, he did not hesitate to employ violence to accomplish his purposes. On February 25, 1534, he preached a sermon at the house of an Anabaptist near a fish market. Afterwards, he proclaimed to the crowd that God ‘s grace had allowed the city to have a favorable beginning, but in order to build the republic of Christ on earth, it was necessary to purify the city of all uncleanness (Unsauberkeit), whether the impure be papists or others who dissented from the prevailing Anabaptist teachings. To achieve this goal, Matthys advocated the execution of all remaining Roman Catholics. However, Knipperdolling, one of the town leaders, disagreed with Matthys, saying that the bloodshed would cause the outside world to be enraged against Münster. A compromise was reached and they decided to expel all the “godless” ((Gottlosen)) from the city and make those who chose to stay behind receive compulsory baptism.
This task of expulsion and compulsion took place several days later. On the morning of February 27, armed men, urged on by Matthys, ran through the streets yelling: “Get out you godless ones, and never come back you enemies of the Father.” In bitter cold, in the midst of snow, rain and wind, droves of the “godless” including the old and invalids, small children, and pregnant women were chased from the town by Anabaptists who beat and laughed at them. They were forced to leave their belongings behind, their food was confiscated and they had no choice but to beg in the countryside for food and lodging. As for those who decided to remain in town, they received compulsory re-baptism in the marketplace. The entire process lasted three days. By eliminating the The Catholics from the city, Matthys and his cohorts not only heightened the sense of chiliastic expectation but they also came to realize that the outside world was growing intolerant of the developments within Münster, and that they were soon to be besieged. The Catholic Bishop of the city, Franz van Waldeck, had been at work some time in recruiting soldiers to confront the Anabaptist threat. The expulsion of the Catholics prompted him to accelerate his efforts. Soon thereafter, earthworks were erected around the town and the siege began. Many Anabaptists were surprised and confused to find themselves at war, but under the leadership of Knipperdolling they soon recovered confidence and began responding to the threat. Men, women, and children were assigned various duties. Small skirmishes took place outside the walls.
The war atmosphere led to a veritable social revolution. Matthys seized the opportunity to consolidate his power over the property and money of the townspeople. He preached that it was the Father’s will that all the goods of the recent exiles be confiscated. Moreover, all the account books and contracts found in their homes were burned. Treasures of literature and art were destroyed. Their clothing, beds, furniture, tables, weapons, and food were placed in a central area and, after praying for three days, Matthys announced that God had given him a sign to appoint seven deacons to distribute the goods to the people.
This trend toward common ownership culminated in an institutionalized communism. Under the leadership of Matthys, the town preachers and council members decided that all goods should be shared in common. Matthys employed Rothmann to promulgate this new vision of society in his sermons. “Dear brothers and sisters,” Rothmann proclaimed, “afterwards we shall be one people. Brothers and sisters, indeed it is completely God ‘s will that we bring our money, silver, and gold together. One person should have just as much as another.” At first this order was met with considerable opposition. The people who had recently received compulsory baptism were assembled and told that unless they relinquished their money they would perish. They were then locked inside a church in a state of mortal fear for several hours. At length Matthys entered the church with a group of armed men. His victims implored him to intercede to God for them, which he did, saying that if they complied, God would allow them back in the community. Ultimately, they complied.
Yet not everyone acceded to Matthys’s authority: some defied him unto death. A blacksmith, for instance, unconvinced by Matthys’s prophecies, accused him of being possessed by the devil. Matthys had him arrested and thrown in the tower. Later he was brought to the market place where many of the citizens were also summoned. Matthys gave a speech in which he declared that God was outraged at this man’s evil actions because he had defiled an otherwise pure town. He was sentenced to death, but before execution, was stabbed repeatedly with a halberd and thrown back into the tower. Later he was placed against the town wall and Matthys himself shot him in the stomach, causing his eventual death. The gathered crowd was told to profit from the example of the blacksmith and they dutifully sang a hymn before dispersing.
A final instance of the authoritarian control exercised by Matthys may be seen in his decision to regulate information. On March 15, 1534, Matthys proclaimed that all books except the Old and New Testaments (which were deemed solely sufficient for conducting a holy life) were to be brought to the cathedral-square where they were burned to ashes. This anti-intellectualist act represents a complete break with the past, and it allowed Matthys to gain a complete monopoly in the interpretation of Scripture.
On Easter Sunday of 1534, Matthys received what he believed to be a divine command to make a sortie against the besiegers of the city with only a few men to help him. The result was a miserable failure. He was pierced with a pike beheaded, and his body hacked to pieces. His head was later raised on a pole outside the city. Thus, the authoritarian reign of Jan Matthys came to an end Summing up the character of this prophet years later, Obbe Philips wrote:
He was so fierce and bloodthirsty that he brought various people to their deaths; yea he was so violent that even his enemies for their part were terrified of him, and finally in a tumult they became too powerful for him, they were so incensed that they did not just kill him . . . but hacked and chopped him into little pieces.
The death of Matthys allowed for his disciple Jan Bockelszoon van Leiden to assume leadership. Under Bockelszoon, the previously- established authoritarian measures of Matthys continued, reaching a crescendo in his decision to anoint himself king. The kingdom which he set up is legendary in German history, so here I will touch upon only its most salient features.
Bockelszoon began his messianic reign by running naked through the streets of Münster in a wild religious frenzy; he then fell into a silent ecstasy for three days. When his power of speech returned, he announced that God had told him to restructure the town government immediately, which he did by appointing twelve men whom he called the Elders or the Judges of the Tribes of Israel (Ältesten der Stämme Israels) who were placed in charge of all the public, private, spiritual, and worldly affairs of the citizens of Münster the “Israelites.” The twelve published a new code of moral law which provided for strict military organization and a tighter communism of goods. Some workers, for instance, previously employed for money, were forced to continue in their trades without pay, simply as servants of the community. The code also had a very rigid stance on sins committed after (re-)baptism, and all citizens were subjected to demanding laws:
If we are God’s sons and have been baptized in Christ then all evil must disappear from among us.... Every one is under the authorities, who have power over all. Because there is no authority outside of God.... If you do evil, fear the authorities. They wield the sword not in vain; they are God’s servants, the avengers to punish the evildoer.Sins punishable by death included blasphemy, seditious language, scolding one’s parents, adultery, lewd conduct, backbiting, spreading scandal, and even complaining! Bockleszoon’s most controversial innovation was polygamy. It was introduced at least partly to emulate the Old Testament patriarchs and also (perhaps) to compensate for the rapid attrition of male citizens due to their military efforts. Bockelszoon established polygamy on his own authority by announcing that all who resisted it would be considered reprobates and therefore in danger of execution. Persons of marriageable age were ordered to marry; unmarried women had to accept the first man to ask them. This often led to disorder in the competition to see who could acquire the most wives, and thus this latter regulation was ultimately rescinded. Bockelszoon himself, beside remarrying Matthys’s widow Divara,ultimately accumulated 15 wives. Bernard Rothmann received second place with nine.
It was not as an ordinary king that Bockelszoon established himself, but as the Messiah of the Last Days. One day a goldsmith declared that the Heavenly Father had revealed to him that Bockelszoon was to be king of the whole world, holding dominion over all kings, princes, and great ones of the earth. He was to inherit the scepter and throne of his forefather David and was to keep them until God should reclaim the kingdom from him. Bockelszoon accepted this man’s prophecy and soon enlisted the town preachers to deliver one sermon after another, explaining that the Messiah foretold by the prophets in the Old Testament was indeed none other than Jan van Leiden Bockleszoon. Bockelszoon himself called a town meeting in which he gave a speech to proclaim his new identity, “Now God has chosen me to be king over the entire world. What I do, I must do, because God has ordained me. Dear brothers and sisters, let us now give thanks to God.” After the sermon, Bockelszoon led the crowd in singing a psalm, and then everyone returned to their homes.
Bockelszoon did everything possible to represent tangibly the importance of his new position. While the siege continued outside the city, the streets and the gates within were given new names. Sundays and feast days were abolished and the days of the week were renamed on an alphabetical system. Even the names of infants were decided upon by the king according to a special system. Gold and silver coins were minted with inscriptions that emphasized Bockelszoon’s unique role: “One King Over All.”A special emblem was devised to symbolize Bockelszoon’s absolute claim to spiritual and temporal dominion: a globe, representing the world, pierced by two swords and surmounted by a cross inscribed with the words: “One king of righteousness over all .” The king himself wore this emblem modeled in gold as a necklace, his attendants wore it as a badge on their sleeves, and it was accepted in Münster as the official emblem of the state.Bockelszoon set up a throne in the marketplace. Draped with cloth and gold, it towered above the surrounding benches which were allotted to other dignitaries and preachers. Often the king would come there to sit in judgment or to oversee the proclamation of new regulations. Heralded by fanfare, he would arrive on horseback wearing a crown and carrying a scepter. In front of him marched officers of the court, behind him came Knipperdolling, who was now chief minister; Rothmann, who was now the royal orator; and a long line of lesser servants. On either side of his throne stood a page, one holding a copy of the Old Testament, the other a sword. Both symbolized the absolute control which Bockelszoon exercised over the citizens.
Though the king indulged in a life of excess, he subjected his citizens to austerity. Harsh regulations of dress went into effect; for God, Bockelszoon had said, abhorred all superfluity in clothing. Every house was searched and anything that was considered surplus was confiscated. To justify the disparity between his lifestyle and that of the people, he explained that luxury was permitted him because he was completely dead to the world and the flesh.
Finally, though Bockelszoon maintained his grip on power through prophetic outbursts and appeals to Scripture, his primary means of controlling the populace was terror and brute force. Two instances suffice to demonstrate this. The first one came in the wake of Bockelszoon’s decree of polygamy when a group of citizens, led by Henry Mollenhecke, attempted to stage a coup and depose him Their efforts failed, however, and Mollenhecke, with forty-eight of his followers was brutally tortured and ultimately beheaded in a macabre process that took four days. Afterwards, two mass graves were dug in the marketplace where all the dead bodies were placed a solemn reminder of Bockelszoon’s authority. Another example of Bockelszoon’s tactics of intimidation was his decision to execute several women for their sins. One was beheaded simply for denying her husband his marital rights, another for bigamy (the practice of polygamy was solely a male prerogative), and a third for insulting one of Bockelszoon’s preachers. Indeed, the king would tolerate no transgressions. It was thus announced that all sinners in the future would be immediately brought before the king and sentenced to death. They would be extirpated from the Chosen People their very memory would be blotted out, and they would find no mercy beyond the grave.
WHILE Bockelszoon was busy with his power and prestige within the city outside the city walls, the siege of Münster, spearheaded by Bishop Franz von Waldeck, continued. By careful diplomatic action, the Bishop had managed to involve both Catholic and Protestant rulers, as well as imperial representatives in support of his cause. Even Philip of Hesse, one of the staunchest supporters of Protestantism, was a faithful supporter. Almost constantly out of funds, the Bishop wrote letters pleading for help to a host of potential patrons: King Ferdinand, elector of Mainz, Trier, Saxony, and Brandenburg; the dukes of Braunschweig, Luneburg, and Saxony; and the bishop of Liege. Although most declined, the bishop raised enough support to maintain the force which he had gathered and to continue the siege and the occasional skirmishes against the city. Despite political and financial support, the actual military enterprise proved largely unsuccessful throughout 1534 and for the first few months of 1535. Endeavors to blockade the city, to drain the moats, and even to take direct military action ultimately failed. In June, 1535, the defence became more and more hopeless, and John, as a last means of escape, determined upon setting fire to the city. His plan was frustrated by the unexpected capture of the town by the besiegers (24 June, 1535). The King, his lieutenant Knipperdollinck, and his chancellor Krechting were seized, and after six months’ imprisonment and torture, executed. As a terrible warning, their bodies were suspended in iron cages from the tower of St. Lambert’s church.
It is true, there were protestant churches that also persecuted people.
It is laughable however to compare what they did to what the Papacy did on a scale so massive, so worldwide, joined with states.
This beast power headquartered in Rome is perfectly described in scripture. From the timelines, dates, her claims, her actions, her wound, her healing of the wound.
In fact, the Bible refers to apostate protestantism when it states the Whore “and her daughters.”
We see that here on FR where evangelicals and protestants join with her again in contempt for those who keep the Sabbath. It can be the evangelicals of today who are the loudest in their contempt for the holy seventh day Sabbath.
One writer goes so far as to say, in the end, with the world imploding and running back to seek God out of fear......the papacy herself won’t even have to call for a universal day of worship to appease God.....the Sunday. It will be the apostate protestant themselves who play that hand. And it will play right into her hand.
And mark of the beast is not so much about which day is God’s law.....although it plays a big part. And although it reveals of who one’s authority rests.
The Mark of the beast will be ulimately revealed in religious intolerance. The call to silence those who keep God’s law. They will be accused of stirring up trouble. And eventually and finally, a universal law will be issued to wipe them from the face of the earth........and then a time of trouble such as never was and will never be again.
When they tried to get Daniel.....they could find nothing on him. So they determined the only thing they could get him would have to be something concering “The LAW of his God.” Daniel 6:5.
We see that attitude here. An almost universal and united opposition among Catholics, evangelicals,, and protestants against the seventh day Sabbath and those who keep it. Sheer contempt and outright hate.
And of course even Mormons and Jehovah witnesses keep the Sunday. Total unity...on the venerable day of the Sun, the child of the papacy.....the counterfeit to what God made holy at creation and set in stone....never to change.
In fact....the seal throughout the entire Bible, from Genesis to Revelation....of his authority and his example.
“And on the seventh day God rested and blessed the seventh day and made it holy.” Genesis 2:1 and 2.
Never tamper with God’s holy things or his people. You might win here.....you lose big in the end.
Oh, that reminds me, I just had a couple of crunchy Vlasic pickles. Yep, they sure were good. You don’t know what you’re missing. I also tried a couple sips of the pickle juice, just to see what I was missing. Not bad.
And I heard that the Catholic church is openly recruiting homosexuals to the priesthood. Your church organization is literally an abomination. 80% of the Vatican clergy are homosexuals.
Who is Mad Marty? I didn’t know the Protestants had a king.
You have not disagreed with what I said. I don't think that you do disagree. However, you jumped to some conclusions that have nothing to do with what I said.
Notice that I didn't say what Church or anything other than The Church. I might have been talking about the Catholic Church, the Church of England, the Church of France (Huguenot), the Puritan Church of New England, or any other Church.
I also made no comparisons. Whether or not government or any other institution committed such ghastly acts is beside the point.
Any Church represents or claims to represent Jesus and His teachings, and surely you agree that torture and execution are a perversion of His teachings and about as far off the beam as one can get.
Laughable? The Lutheran body count alone dwarfs the Catholic. And that’s counting the actions of secular governments led by Catholics as if they were the Catholic Church, a distinction which is itself quite absurd. The Protestant Revolution took hold as Islam was sweeping across central Europe, and secular leaders were astonished and dismayed as sect after sect decided that they must be pacifist in the conflict vs Islam, yet spurred on violence and hatred against the Church itself.
Within eleven years of the start of Luther’s “ministry,” Islam had arrived at the capital of the Holy Roman Empire. And while Catholic princes expended their treasures and troops to fight the Islamic horde, Protestants used the gripes over high taxation rates (tithes) to stir dissent.
Were these nonetheless sincere, but awkwardly timed? The Peasant’s Rebellion (opposed by Calvin and viciously so by Luther) might reasonably have inspired preaching against the nobility’s relative affluence amidst the suffering of the masses, but then that would have cost the support of the nobility so Calvin and Luther instead took aim solely at the distant Vatican; Luther lied about ever going there, as is easily exposed by the fact that he knew not the most basic things about the geography (for instance, the Vatican is not actually in Rome.)
The complaints of the first generations’ Protestants seem so bizarre compared to current Protestant theology that it’s no wonder that Protestants have all but completely buried them in history. They were all primarily ordered around invalidating the Christianity of any and all authorities.
Luther, who claimed that you can commit any obscene crime you want (thus assuring the support of his wanton, whore-mongering, mass-murdering nobility) as long as you had faith which he insisted alone can save you, nonetheless also claimed that Church sacraments were void if the priest were a sinner. The Anabaptists and Hussites preached pacifism in the face of the Islamic onslaught (which Luther originally even welcomed), but promoted war against the Catholic authoroties. The Anabaptists also argued that anything any Catholic said was diabolical, prima facie, because they had not validly received the sacrament of Baptism... again, despite also claiming we are saved by faith alone.
As such, since the Protestants mingled religious excuses (none of which are upheld today by major Protestant denominations) for insurrection and treason, the Catholic Church in response failed to distinguish between heresy on the one hand and insurrection and treason on the other; and tended to see Protestantism in the same vein as the Islamic horde with which Protestantism frequently sought to align itself with.
And here is where I commend the Mennonites, for while Menno followed the Anabaptists into theological error due to his admitted utter lack of education, he instructed his followers to remain steadfastly pacifistic, even in the face of unjust persecution.
I must also note that I do not argue that the Catholic Church’s reponse was enlightened or correct; merely that it reflected the times and the fact that the warriors were the secular leaders. While the Catholic rulers benefited from those who used worldly means of opposition to the insurrection and treason around them, the people actually promoted as heroes according to the Catholic doctrine were those who preached more truly Christian ways, such as Ignatius of Loyola, Francis of Assissi, Dominic de Guzman; and not the counterparts of Luther, Calvin, etc.
Also, I forgot to mention the outrageous theological sword of Hus: He insisted that those who receive communion only by one species (such as from the cup or the host) were certainly doomed to Hell for failure to receive from both. This meant that his friends, from cathedrals and universities, were supposedly saved, but the country bumpkins and visiting scholars were all condemned to Hell by him, since both species were typically offered only when multiple priests were present.
No matter how excellent the refutation of Hus was, all he needed to do to win an argument was claim that if you listen to his opponent, you’re obviously possessed by Satan, because you haven’t been exorcised by valid reception of the sacraments.
KNowing this about Hus, its hard to see how the Protestant reformers were doing anything more sincere than “waving the bloody shirt” in much the same was as the Muslims, claiming to be Ismaelites, do against the Israelites for Israel tricking Ismael out of his inheritance.
Right, yeah because the Catholic Church is known for being so gay sex friendly. That’s why the homosexuals protest and attack our churches and their ilk try to restrict and attack our sacraments. /Sarc
You make accusations without proof. Sounds like Martin Luther taught you well.
That’s quite a rant. All over Sunday.
Bet I get to hear next that MILLIONS UP ON MILLIONS we’re executed by the Catholic Church. I love seeing those numbers, especially when you look at the estimated population of Europe at that time, which means we would have had to import people just to kill them.
At what point do you self reflect and think that maybe your statements are all hogwash?
Then what do you know of Church history?
Most Protestants only know what happened in their lifetime.
The lack of intellectual rigor is amazing.
And you just exemplified it.
I know what RC apologists attempt to offer from church history is highly selective. But when examined in context it quickly falls short of Rome’s claims.
Oh you mean a rant over the holy law of God. Thank you. The law of God is perfect converting the soul. That’s in scripture.
The papacy ruled for over 1000 years. Millions of people in that time span? The US has only been around for less than 300 years.
We’re at 300 million.
Some of you aren’t very smart..
(Sigh) 300 million poor lost souls.
Glass houses, Phil.
“Caught in the collision of two worlds, three gay and lesbian Seventh-day Adventists wrestle with how to reconcile their faith, identity, and sexuality.”
Catholic church = systemic CLERGY homosexuality vs your example of three individuals and their struggle in the SDA church.
Hahahahahahahaha!!
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.