OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 05:48:18 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Tragedy of the "Reformation"  (Read 1960 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« on: January 14, 2012, 10:39:10 AM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2012, 10:41:06 AM »

Who cares?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2012, 11:01:45 AM »

Who cares?

Another good question.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2012, 11:22:46 AM »

Discussions related to Orthodoxy in comparison and contrast to other Christian faiths are the main purpose of this subforum. You ask whether is was a tragedy when reformation failed to accomplish something and some Roman Catholics choose protestant sects instead of their own.

I don't see a point in asking such a question. Mutual relations between the RCCs and Protestants are their own problem that doesn't matter the Church.
.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2012, 01:18:03 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

That the RC Church was not reformed is the greatest tragedy.  It was never Luther's intent to form another Church, and he did not like it when people called themselves "Lutherans".  Luther, and other German theologians, had a great respect for "The Eastern Church", and freely admitted in many of their writings that the "Eastern Church" was closest to what they envisioned the "early" Church to be.  Later theologians, such as Melancthion, were drifting closer and closer to the Orthodox Church, with the Greek version of the Augsburg Confession being influenced by a Serbian Deacon sent by the EP to Germany.  Had Luther been successful in reforming the Latin Church, it is very likely that East and West would be united today, since most of what Luther detested about Roman Catholicism is equally detested by the Orthodox.  A reformation of the Latin Church would also likely have taken the steam out of the other reformer's sails, and we may not be seeing the 2500 different Protestant sects that we see today. 

As to "who cares"; anyone who actually cares about the souls of those Christians who have not been illuminated by Holy Orthodoxy and who sit in the darkness of the failure of the Reformation.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2012, 01:19:04 PM »

Discussions related to Orthodoxy in comparison and contrast to other Christian faiths are the main purpose of this subforum. You ask whether is was a tragedy when reformation failed to accomplish something and some Roman Catholics choose protestant sects instead of their own.

I don't see a point in asking such a question. Mutual relations between the RCCs and Protestants are their own problem that doesn't matter the Church.
.


So your blindness should affect us all?
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2012, 01:29:14 PM »

Discussions related to Orthodoxy in comparison and contrast to other Christian faiths are the main purpose of this subforum. You ask whether is was a tragedy when reformation failed to accomplish something and some Roman Catholics choose protestant sects instead of their own.

I don't see a point in asking such a question. Mutual relations between the RCCs and Protestants are their own problem that doesn't matter the Church.
.


So your blindness should affect us all?

Hmm, I guess the question would be: Is person A blind, or is person B hallucinating?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2012, 01:37:14 PM »

Discussions related to Orthodoxy in comparison and contrast to other Christian faiths are the main purpose of this subforum. You ask whether is was a tragedy when reformation failed to accomplish something and some Roman Catholics choose protestant sects instead of their own.

I don't see a point in asking such a question. Mutual relations between the RCCs and Protestants are their own problem that doesn't matter the Church.
.


So your blindness should affect us all?

Hmm, I guess the question would be: Is person A blind, or is person B hallucinating?

Things are seldom A or B, but rather a combination of the two.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,576


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2012, 01:56:23 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

That the RC Church was not reformed is the greatest tragedy.  It was never Luther's intent to form another Church, and he did not like it when people called themselves "Lutherans".  Luther, and other German theologians, had a great respect for "The Eastern Church", and freely admitted in many of their writings that the "Eastern Church" was closest to what they envisioned the "early" Church to be.  Later theologians, such as Melancthion, were drifting closer and closer to the Orthodox Church, with the Greek version of the Augsburg Confession being influenced by a Serbian Deacon sent by the EP to Germany.  Had Luther been successful in reforming the Latin Church, it is very likely that East and West would be united today, since most of what Luther detested about Roman Catholicism is equally detested by the Orthodox.  A reformation of the Latin Church would also likely have taken the steam out of the other reformer's sails, and we may not be seeing the 2500 different Protestant sects that we see today. 

As to "who cares"; anyone who actually cares about the souls of those Christians who have not been illuminated by Holy Orthodoxy and who sit in the darkness of the failure of the Reformation.

Well phrased. However, i think that it is probably 'wrong' to conclude that there would not be a multiplicity of schismatic sects in existence today - there may be fewer, but when Luther let the 'genie out of the bottle' it would have been difficult to cap the bottle completely! They would likely differ in number and influence from what exists today, but they would still be out there!
Logged
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 14, 2012, 02:10:14 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

Well, taking off my "Orthodox hat" for a second, and viewing the Reformation and subsequent events with as little of the "Former" in my handle as humanly possible, that is to say objectively- while it might not have had the outcome desired by Luther when he nailed the 95 Theses to a church door, the Reformation did end up having some positive effects on the Roman Catholic Church, in the form of the Counter Reformation and the Council of Trent. While neither the Protestants or the Orthodox are satisfied by the outcome of that council, it did go a good way to clearing up much of the corruption that had infected the Roman Church by that time.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2012, 03:10:08 PM »


It was never Luther's intent to form another Church,

That's a good point.

and he did not like it when people called themselves "Lutherans". 

As a matter of fact, I've heard that the term "Lutherans" was actually given to them by their detractors.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2012, 04:03:27 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

Well, taking off my "Orthodox hat" for a second, and viewing the Reformation and subsequent events with as little of the "Former" in my handle as humanly possible, that is to say objectively- while it might not have had the outcome desired by Luther when he nailed the 95 Theses to a church door, the Reformation did end up having some positive effects on the Roman Catholic Church, in the form of the Counter Reformation and the Council of Trent. While neither the Protestants or the Orthodox are satisfied by the outcome of that council, it did go a good way to clearing up much of the corruption that had infected the Roman Church by that time.

That's a good point. I shouldn't have said "it fail[ed] to reform the Catholic Church". Rather, it led to reforms in the short term, but in the bigger picture it actually retarded reform. (As I said earlier, since the Reformation, reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects, thus making reform extremely difficult.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
FatherGiryus
You are being watched.
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch - NA
Posts: 2,122



« Reply #12 on: January 14, 2012, 04:27:05 PM »

Rather than starting a new ID, you might want to 'reform' your profile...   Cheesy

Welcome back?
Logged

http://orthodoxyandrecovery.blogspot.com
The most dangerous thing about riding a tiger is the dismount.  - Indian proverb
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 14, 2012, 04:28:38 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

Well, taking off my "Orthodox hat" for a second, and viewing the Reformation and subsequent events with as little of the "Former" in my handle as humanly possible, that is to say objectively- while it might not have had the outcome desired by Luther when he nailed the 95 Theses to a church door, the Reformation did end up having some positive effects on the Roman Catholic Church, in the form of the Counter Reformation and the Council of Trent. While neither the Protestants or the Orthodox are satisfied by the outcome of that council, it did go a good way to clearing up much of the corruption that had infected the Roman Church by that time.

That's a good point. I shouldn't have said "it fail[ed] to reform the Catholic Church". Rather, it led to reforms in the short term, but in the bigger picture it actually retarded reform. (As I said earlier, since the Reformation, reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects, thus making reform extremely difficult.)


I suppose the main question is- do you mean "reform"-minded Catholics or "Reform"-minded Catholics? Anyone wishing to reform the Roman Catholic Church (whether it be reintroducing a married priest-hood or changing the way the church handles priest-pedophilia) yet still believes Catholic beliefs (the Real Presence, praying to saints, the ever-virginity of Mary, male priesthood, etc) does not really have a whole lot of options in Protestantism (especially if they retain a Catholic ecclesiology), less so these days than in the past, but even in the past as well (especially if their belief in the Real Presence equated to transubstantiation). Those wishing to Reform the RCC (calvinism, symbolic communion, women priests, etc) would probably be better off (both for themselves and the Church, they would be eating and drinking their own damnation if they stayed, after all) joining the ranks of Protestantism.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2012, 04:30:42 PM by FormerReformer » Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #14 on: January 14, 2012, 07:01:39 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

Well, taking off my "Orthodox hat" for a second, and viewing the Reformation and subsequent events with as little of the "Former" in my handle as humanly possible, that is to say objectively- while it might not have had the outcome desired by Luther when he nailed the 95 Theses to a church door, the Reformation did end up having some positive effects on the Roman Catholic Church, in the form of the Counter Reformation and the Council of Trent. While neither the Protestants or the Orthodox are satisfied by the outcome of that council, it did go a good way to clearing up much of the corruption that had infected the Roman Church by that time.

That's a good point. I shouldn't have said "it fail[ed] to reform the Catholic Church". Rather, it led to reforms in the short term, but in the bigger picture it actually retarded reform. (As I said earlier, since the Reformation, reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects, thus making reform extremely difficult.)


I suppose the main question is- do you mean "reform"-minded Catholics or "Reform"-minded Catholics? Anyone wishing to reform the Roman Catholic Church (whether it be reintroducing a married priest-hood or changing the way the church handles priest-pedophilia) yet still believes Catholic beliefs (the Real Presence, praying to saints, the ever-virginity of Mary, male priesthood, etc) does not really have a whole lot of options in Protestantism (especially if they retain a Catholic ecclesiology), less so these days than in the past, but even in the past as well (especially if their belief in the Real Presence equated to transubstantiation). Those wishing to Reform the RCC (calvinism, symbolic communion, women priests, etc) would probably be better off (both for themselves and the Church, they would be eating and drinking their own damnation if they stayed, after all) joining the ranks of Protestantism.

I think you're "Reform/reform" dichotomy is applicable, but it can be taken too far, which is part of the problem. Or perhaps I should say, part of the problem is that someone interested in "reform" might be labelled as "Reform" (even by well-meaning fellow Catholics).

This is a tad random, but I was just thinking about an email-question on the show Web Of Faith, many years ago. Best as I can recall the emailer had been disappointed that her priest had bible readings at a wake, rather than praying the rosary. She didn't think it fair that this "Protestant service" (her words) had been imposed on them.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Doubting Thomas
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 874

Anglican (but not Episcopagan)


« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2012, 11:46:35 AM »

I read a quote once (can't recall the source) that stated (WTTE) that 'The Reformation was a tragic necessity; most Catholics don't recognize the necessity and most Prostestants don't recognize the trajedy.'
Logged

"My Lord and My God!"--Doubting Thomas, AD 33
Scotty
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Portland
Posts: 86



« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2012, 11:07:38 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

That the RC Church was not reformed is the greatest tragedy.  It was never Luther's intent to form another Church, and he did not like it when people called themselves "Lutherans".  Luther, and other German theologians, had a great respect for "The Eastern Church", and freely admitted in many of their writings that the "Eastern Church" was closest to what they envisioned the "early" Church to be.  Later theologians, such as Melancthion, were drifting closer and closer to the Orthodox Church, with the Greek version of the Augsburg Confession being influenced by a Serbian Deacon sent by the EP to Germany.  Had Luther been successful in reforming the Latin Church, it is very likely that East and West would be united today, since most of what Luther detested about Roman Catholicism is equally detested by the Orthodox.  A reformation of the Latin Church would also likely have taken the steam out of the other reformer's sails, and we may not be seeing the 2500 different Protestant sects that we see today.  

I have to put it bluntly, but that is a load of crap.  Luther married a former nun after leaving the Church, this in itself should show his true ambitions!  He may have "respected" the Eastern Church, but acted in total disobedience to the teachings of both the Eastern and Western Churches.  He was a monk who couldn't cut the monastic life and wanted things his way.  He called for rampant iconoclasm, church desecration and destruction, violence, and justified himself and others because he believed no sin could take him away from salvation.  His sects were responsible for over 100,000 deaths in a three-year period, a number the Inquisition doesn't even come close to in its 300+ year existence.  True, he told his mother to remain Catholic, and I pray he is shown mercy for doing so.

The Latin Church was reformed, and only prospered.  Some of its great modern Saints were the fathers, sons, and daughters of the counter-reformation.  If it had gone the way Luther wanted, the Novus Ordo would've happened a few hundred years ago.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2012, 11:08:10 PM by Scotty » Logged
Scotty
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Portland
Posts: 86



« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2012, 11:10:18 PM »

I read a quote once (can't recall the source) that stated (WTTE) that 'The Reformation was a tragic necessity; most Catholics don't recognize the necessity and most Prostestants don't recognize the trajedy.'

This was probably America or NCR.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2012, 09:19:11 AM »

Actually, historians on both sides of the issue agree that Luther's "leaving" the Church was really a matter of being kicked out. The disagreement is that Catholics generally believe that he deserved to be excommunicated, whereas Lutherans believe that he didn't.


This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

That the RC Church was not reformed is the greatest tragedy.  It was never Luther's intent to form another Church, and he did not like it when people called themselves "Lutherans".  Luther, and other German theologians, had a great respect for "The Eastern Church", and freely admitted in many of their writings that the "Eastern Church" was closest to what they envisioned the "early" Church to be.  Later theologians, such as Melancthion, were drifting closer and closer to the Orthodox Church, with the Greek version of the Augsburg Confession being influenced by a Serbian Deacon sent by the EP to Germany.  Had Luther been successful in reforming the Latin Church, it is very likely that East and West would be united today, since most of what Luther detested about Roman Catholicism is equally detested by the Orthodox.  A reformation of the Latin Church would also likely have taken the steam out of the other reformer's sails, and we may not be seeing the 2500 different Protestant sects that we see today.  

I have to put it bluntly, but that is a load of crap.  Luther married a former nun after leaving the Church, this in itself should show his true ambitions!  He may have "respected" the Eastern Church, but acted in total disobedience to the teachings of both the Eastern and Western Churches.  He was a monk who couldn't cut the monastic life and wanted things his way.  He called for rampant iconoclasm, church desecration and destruction, violence, and justified himself and others because he believed no sin could take him away from salvation.  His sects were responsible for over 100,000 deaths in a three-year period, a number the Inquisition doesn't even come close to in its 300+ year existence.  True, he told his mother to remain Catholic, and I pray he is shown mercy for doing so.

The Latin Church was reformed, and only prospered.  Some of its great modern Saints were the fathers, sons, and daughters of the counter-reformation.  If it had gone the way Luther wanted, the Novus Ordo would've happened a few hundred years ago.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #19 on: January 18, 2012, 12:58:00 PM »

Not to mention that most of his most polemic works against the Roman Church happened AFTER he was effectively kicked out. 

Actually, historians on both sides of the issue agree that Luther's "leaving" the Church was really a matter of being kicked out. The disagreement is that Catholics generally believe that he deserved to be excommunicated, whereas Lutherans believe that he didn't.


This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

That the RC Church was not reformed is the greatest tragedy.  It was never Luther's intent to form another Church, and he did not like it when people called themselves "Lutherans".  Luther, and other German theologians, had a great respect for "The Eastern Church", and freely admitted in many of their writings that the "Eastern Church" was closest to what they envisioned the "early" Church to be.  Later theologians, such as Melancthion, were drifting closer and closer to the Orthodox Church, with the Greek version of the Augsburg Confession being influenced by a Serbian Deacon sent by the EP to Germany.  Had Luther been successful in reforming the Latin Church, it is very likely that East and West would be united today, since most of what Luther detested about Roman Catholicism is equally detested by the Orthodox.  A reformation of the Latin Church would also likely have taken the steam out of the other reformer's sails, and we may not be seeing the 2500 different Protestant sects that we see today.  

I have to put it bluntly, but that is a load of crap.  Luther married a former nun after leaving the Church, this in itself should show his true ambitions!  He may have "respected" the Eastern Church, but acted in total disobedience to the teachings of both the Eastern and Western Churches.  He was a monk who couldn't cut the monastic life and wanted things his way.  He called for rampant iconoclasm, church desecration and destruction, violence, and justified himself and others because he believed no sin could take him away from salvation.  His sects were responsible for over 100,000 deaths in a three-year period, a number the Inquisition doesn't even come close to in its 300+ year existence.  True, he told his mother to remain Catholic, and I pray he is shown mercy for doing so.

The Latin Church was reformed, and only prospered.  Some of its great modern Saints were the fathers, sons, and daughters of the counter-reformation.  If it had gone the way Luther wanted, the Novus Ordo would've happened a few hundred years ago.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Scotty
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Portland
Posts: 86



« Reply #20 on: January 20, 2012, 11:01:10 AM »

Actually, historians on both sides of the issue agree that Luther's "leaving" the Church was really a matter of being kicked out. The disagreement is that Catholics generally believe that he deserved to be excommunicated, whereas Lutherans believe that he didn't.


Ok, we were thinking of different things.  When I meant "intent to leave the Church" I meant it as "intent to alter the Church."  Spiritual leave, if you will.  As in, if his intent was to not leave, he wouldn't have changed so much, resembling more pre-modern Old Catholics or Old Calendarists from mainline Orthodox; separated, "reformed", but of the same faith and practices (don't flame me OC's that are on here).  But yes in terms of phyically leaving the Church, I agree he was removed (there wouldn't be any precedence for packing up and leaving, so I doubt he would've).  His intent was still to severely alter the Catholic faith, both before and after being removed.
Logged
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2012, 01:27:38 PM »

Actually, historians on both sides of the issue agree that Luther's "leaving" the Church was really a matter of being kicked out. The disagreement is that Catholics generally believe that he deserved to be excommunicated, whereas Lutherans believe that he didn't.


Ok, we were thinking of different things.  When I meant "intent to leave the Church" I meant it as "intent to alter the Church."  Spiritual leave, if you will.  As in, if his intent was to not leave, he wouldn't have changed so much, resembling more pre-modern Old Catholics or Old Calendarists from mainline Orthodox; separated, "reformed", but of the same faith and practices (don't flame me OC's that are on here).  But yes in terms of phyically leaving the Church, I agree he was removed (there wouldn't be any precedence for packing up and leaving, so I doubt he would've).  His intent was still to severely alter the Catholic faith, both before and after being removed.

Keeping in mind that you are on an ORTHODOX forum, it is safe to say that the "Catholic" faith of the time needed severe altering.  Still does in my opinion.  I think that to this day, Lutherans make some of the easiest converts to Orthodoxy because they are so close to Orthodoxy.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
katherineofdixie
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,354



« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2012, 03:06:06 PM »

I have to put it bluntly, but that is a load of crap.  Luther married a former nun after leaving the Church, this in itself should show his true ambitions!  He may have "respected" the Eastern Church, but acted in total disobedience to the teachings of both the Eastern and Western Churches.  He was a monk who couldn't cut the monastic life and wanted things his way.  He called for rampant iconoclasm, church desecration and destruction, violence, and justified himself and others because he believed no sin could take him away from salvation.  His sects were responsible for over 100,000 deaths in a three-year period, a number the Inquisition doesn't even come close to in its 300+ year existence.  True, he told his mother to remain Catholic, and I pray he is shown mercy for doing so.


None of the above is true. Check your history. Luther did not call for iconoclasm, desecration and the rest. Although you can certainly find polemical writings, particularly after his excommunication.
Nor is he responsible for what others claimed to do in his name. There was plenty of bloodshed on either side - it had nothing to do with anyone's religious beliefs.
He was an observant monk who was chastised by his superiors for being too hard on himself. He was also a theologian and professor at the university. He did not know Katie before she left the convent and there is evidence to suggest that she did not want to be there in the first place. He married because he had been telling others that marriage was a good and honorable estate, and because she was alone in the world.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2012, 03:08:23 PM by katherineofdixie » Logged

"If but ten of us lead a holy life, we shall kindle a fire which shall light up the entire city."

 St. John Chrysostom
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,478


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 20, 2012, 04:14:48 PM »

If Luther and others tried to reform the Roman Church to come back to Orthodoxy, then I think it would matter more on here. As the Orthodox see it, you had a bunch of folks try to change an incorrect church into an even more incorrect church.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #24 on: January 20, 2012, 04:23:59 PM »

Yeah, I don't understand why anyone here would care about this. It is a tragedy in the sense that it was a further schism from the Church, but that started many centuries before Luther et al. in Western Europe got all uppity. These reformers were just doing what Rome itself had done centuries before them. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Logged

mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #25 on: January 20, 2012, 04:28:00 PM »

If Luther and others tried to reform the Roman Church to come back to Orthodoxy, then I think it would matter more on here. As the Orthodox see it, you had a bunch of folks try to change an incorrect church into an even more incorrect church.

PP

QFT
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #26 on: January 20, 2012, 10:49:38 PM »

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Hmmm ... maybe that's what inspired Herman's Hermits to include "Second verse, same as the first" in their song.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2012, 03:30:28 AM »

...freely admitted in many of their writings that the "Eastern Church" was closest to what they envisioned the "early" Church to be.

Source? Also, I wonder why they reformed their churches to the oppiste direction from the Eastern Church if they truly thought it was closest to the early Church.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2012, 03:34:53 AM by Alpo » Logged

Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2012, 09:53:49 AM »

...freely admitted in many of their writings that the "Eastern Church" was closest to what they envisioned the "early" Church to be.

Source? Also, I wonder why they reformed their churches to the oppiste direction from the Eastern Church if they truly thought it was closest to the early Church.

Key word - Reformed.  Much of European Lutheranism is a mix of Lutheran and Calvanistic theology.  It is that "union" that caused many of the Germans here in the United States to flee Europe.  The Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church was founded by those that fled European Lutheranism.  As to much of modern Lutheranism, such as the ELCA in this country, it is barely recognizable as Christian, let alone having anything to do with the Lutheran Confessions.

As to sources, try reading Luther's works, particularly his writings from the early years of the Reformation.  It will take you a while to read all of it as the English translation contains 55 volumes.  I heard some of it is on-line now.  I never made it through all of them, but I have read quite a few of his works studying to be a lay minister in the Wisconsin Synod Lutheran Church.  The footnotes of Pieper's Dogmatics (I have read all four volumes), as well as Lensky's Commentaries on the New Testament (pretty much one volume for each book of the New Testament, with some of the smaller Epistles combined into a single volume) also contain references to this line of thought.  As to specific pages, you can read them like I did.  I don't intend to re-read them just to provide sources.  Sometimes you just have to spend years reading.  I also gave many of my Lutheran books away to a young Pastor when I joined the Orthodox Church.  Thankfully, I kept my Commentaries.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2012, 01:02:39 PM »

Also, I wonder why they reformed their churches to the oppiste direction from the Eastern Church if they truly thought it was closest to the early Church.

Since you asked that on an Orthodox forum, you can probably expect to get an answer something like this:

Quote
In his classic introduction to Orthodoxy, Bishop Kallistos Ware quotes the nineteenth-century Russian theologian Alexis Khomiakov:

All Protestants are Crypto-Papists. To use the concise language of algebra, all the West knows but one datum a; whether it be preceded by the positive sign +, as with the Romanists, or with the negative -, as with the Protestants, the a remains the same.20

In other words, Roman Catholicism and Protestantism are but two sides of the same coin. They may present different faces, but the underlying substance is the same.

This explains why many conservative Protestants are attracted to Rome. Allegiance to Rome allows them to overcome the inherent inconsistencies in Protestantism without having to abandon the basic presupposition of Protestantism, namely that Christianity is an ideology derived from a text.21

Sola Scriptura is patently illogical. The popular Protestant saying, The Bible says it; that settles it makes no sense because, strictly speaking, the Bible does not say anything. It is a text, and like all texts it must be interpreted. An infallible book is only useful if you have an infallible interpreter, which is where the pope comes in. Where two or three Protestants are gathered together, there you have four or five different interpretations of the Bible. With an infallible pope, however, you only have to deal with one interpretation - at a time, that is.22

- from http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_carltonrome.aspx
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2012, 02:53:19 PM »

This isn't so much a question but rather a little musing: it seems to me that the greatest tragedy of the Protestant "Reformation" is that not only did it fail to reform the Catholic Church, but it actually made it more difficult for reform to happen in future generations. Specifically, since the "Reformation", reform-minded Catholics usually leave the Church to join one of the Protestant sects.

Anyone else come to that conclusion?

Rome already had a non-protestant Reformation called the counter-Reformation. This is where the council of Trent comes from. And even before the protestant reformation, Rome had a Reform tradition going all the way back to at least the 12th century. Also, in more recent times, Rome had another Reform in Vatican 2.

Rome is always Reforming, so it's hard for me to follow where you are going with this.
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,029


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2012, 08:42:39 PM »

All those were attempts by the RCC to affect change within itself, not other churches.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2012, 08:45:50 PM »

Yes, but to what end, Biro?
Logged

biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,029


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #33 on: January 21, 2012, 08:57:31 PM »

It's been said that some reforms have been attempts to increase the piety and quality of practice within the RCC. One could say the works of St. Teresa of Avila or the Rule of St. Benedict and the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius were of this type. Others, such as Vatican II, were intended to have certain results but turned into something else. I always wondered what would have happened if the Pope who called for Vatican II hadn't up and died right then.  Sad
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Kaste
Site Supporter
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: member of the Invisible Church
Posts: 158


« Reply #34 on: January 22, 2012, 01:28:09 PM »

Make no mistake, the Reformation was guided by God.  

His way of fixing His Church in this imperfect world.

K
« Last Edit: January 22, 2012, 01:37:53 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #35 on: January 22, 2012, 01:39:00 PM »

Hmmm. His way of fixing His Church, huh? I must've missed this news of the Orthodox reformation of that time... Wink
Logged

Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2012, 02:04:25 PM »

Make no mistake, the Reformation was guided by God.  

His way of fixing His Church in this imperfect world.

K

I think that it was guided by God, but not for the reason that you state. 
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2012, 02:23:45 PM »

Yeah, Luther should be canonised like St. Alexis Toth.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,478


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #38 on: January 23, 2012, 11:47:31 AM »

Make no mistake, the Reformation was guided by God.  

His way of fixing His Church in this imperfect world.

K
So sayeth the group with 35,000 groups all calling each other wrong.......yep, its like elmers glue holding up steel I-beams.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #39 on: January 23, 2012, 01:59:25 PM »

Since you asked that on an Orthodox forum, you can probably expect to get an answer something like this:

Probably yes but I'm not sure if I buy that. Most of that kind of stuff seems to bases on various collections of straw-men about Western Christianity and about Orthodoxy itself.
Logged

Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.148 seconds with 66 queries.