Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Theresa; Jean Chauvin; RnMomof7; George W. Bush; rwfromkansas
Your slander is incorrect.

Luther approved of and admired Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion," and believed the reforms which he set into motion were in good hands with John Calvin in Geneva.

Calvin called Luther "my much respected father who has denounced the darkness of the papacy" and a "great miracle of God."

When Catholics fail at debating doctrine, they fall back on the inconsequential fact that there's more than one Protestant church.

Sola Fide; Sola Gracia; Sola Scriptura.

9 posted on 07/28/2002 1:54:59 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Dr. Eckleburg
"Your slander is incorrect. Luther approved of and admired Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion," and believed the reforms which he set into motion were in good hands with John Calvin in Geneva."

Oh really? They were chums? Are you a Lutheran then? You agree with Luther on everything?

"Calvin called Luther "my much respected father who has denounced the darkness of the papacy" and a "great miracle of God."

Lutherans and Calvinists came to oppose and even hate each other. "Calvin couldn't comprehend why he, of all people, was assaulted by Lutherans, unless it be that "Satan, whose vile slaves they are, so much the more urges them on against me as he sees my labors more useful to the Church than theirs." (112;v.1:335) Whoever blushed at those expressions which Luther's arrogance drew from his pen, will not be less confounded at the excesses of Calvin: his adversaries are always knaves, fools, rogues, drunkards, furies, madmen, beasts, bulls, asses, dogs, swine; and Calvin's fine style is polluted with this filth through every page. Be they Catholics or Lutherans, it is all one to him, he spares none. (112;v.1:335)

144 posted on 07/29/2002 12:17:49 AM PDT by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
"When Catholics fail at debating doctrine, they fall back on the inconsequential fact that there's more than one Protestant church. Sola Fide; Sola Gracia; Sola Scriptura."

Inconsequential? Read a history book!! The Reformers NEVER thought their differences were inconsequential!!!

Donald Bloesch

Well-known and respected evangelical theologian Bloesch excoriates the divisions of Protestantism (which are characteristic of its whole history), in a section entitled The Scandal of Disunity:

The disunity of the Christian church today . . . is indeed deplorable. But even more scandalous is the disunity that plagues the evangelical family . . . Christian disunity is a contradiction of Christ's prayer that his people be one (John 17:20-23). It also conflicts with Paul's declaration that there is only one body and one Spirit . . . one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph 4:4-5). Disunity on theological and even sociological grounds betrays an appalling ignorance of the nature of the church. Indeed the classical marks of the church of Jesus Christ are oneness, holiness, apostolicity and catholicity. The last term denotes universal outreach and continuity with the tradition of the whole church. It is incontestable that the church, and especially the evangelical church, has lost much of its credibility on the mission field because of the bitter infighting between missionary boards and churches. (31)

148 posted on 07/29/2002 12:26:01 AM PDT by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
As I said the Reformation was a DEFORMATION.

Johannes Janssen, thoroughly familiar with this time period, testifies:

The . . . 'modus operandi' of the founders of the new religious system, with their utter absence of respect for all ecclesiastical rights, all church possessions, all freedom of conscience, caused general anarchy and demoralisation among the people . . .

All contemporaries unanimously make the same statements. The writings and letters of the founders of the new Church system overflow with complaints . . . Quite openly they all acknowledge that it was only after the introduction of the new doctrine that this unhallowed change took place, and that the condition of things was nowhere so bad as among those who called themselves evangelical. (111;v.16:1-3)

The German liberal Protestant historian Adolf von Harnack conceded that:

The man in the street is NOT sorry to hear that 'good works' . . . constitute a danger to the soul . . . The inevitable result was that in the reformed Churches in Germany from the very start there were accusations of moral laxity and a want of serious purpose in the sanctification of life . . . But religion is not only a state of the heart; it is a deed as well . . . The Reformation . . . was also incapable of perceiving all the conclusions to which its new ideas led, and of giving them pure effect. (46)

It is useful to ask what the actual conditions in Germany were before the advent of Luther's Revolution. Will Durant informs us:

By and large, religion was flourishing in Germany, and the overwhelming majority of the people were orthodox and . . . pious. The German family was almost a church in itself, where the mother served as a catechist and the father as priest; prayer was frequent, and books of family devotions were in every home. (122:328)

THE PROTESTANT REVOLT: Its Pernicious and Tragic Initial Impact http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ407.HTM

149 posted on 07/29/2002 12:31:15 AM PDT by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | 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