Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A History of the Church: 1517 A.D. to the Present Protestantism and its Forms
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Church_Dogma/Church_Dogma_013.htm ^ | unknown | Fr. John A. Hardon

Posted on 11/15/2006 10:40:30 AM PST by stfassisi

A History of the Church: 1517 A.D. to the Present Theology for the Laity Series Protestantism and its Forms by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.

We’re now beginning our second semester in Church History and as you remember what we did was we went up to the beginning of the sixteenth century and we are now starting what is really called Modern History. Modern Church History begins with a rise of Protestantism. As I mentioned earlier I am giving you the pages from the Church History of Fr. John Laux that I understand is the pronunciation, and it covers in a very condensed form, all the main historical aspects of the rise of Protestantism, and of course, it’s effect on the Catholic Church. I will not go through this now; I am however expecting you people to read what’s here. And what I would like to have you do is sort of give you some kind of a quiz at the end, say of the month before we meet again, remember, on October the ninth. I’ll ask you to choose any single aspect of what you read here, don’t just copy, but give me your own impressions, either about the rise of Protestantism, or about the major forms of Protestantism, namely Lutheranism, Calvinism, what is called Zwingalism and Anglicanism. I would ask you to share with me and make it as lengthy or detailed as you wish. I rather not ask specific questions, I would rather have you give me in your own words your understanding, of for example, Lutheranism or Anglicanism, but always its significance for the history of the Catholic Church. So that any title you choose, could be put in these words, the significance of whatever you choose, some aspects of Protestantism the significance of I repeat of Martin Luther, the significance of John Calvin, the significance of Thomas Cranmer, the significance of St. Thomas Moore. The significance of, and then you choose, either a person, or a movement, or a particular heresy, in other words, we are dealing with a countless number of subjects on which, not just thousands of books, but a whole library, has been written in the last four hundred years.

What I thought I would do during class today is to choose first to talk about Protestantism, and then within Protestantism the four principle forms of Protestantism how they differ from each other, and especially how they differ from Catholic Christianity.

Protestantism First then, Protestantism. The combination, Protestant Reformation, is found in all English written books, it is however not a Catholic idea, in fact it is contrary to authentic history. There was no Protestant Reformation. There was a Protestant revolution. And there was, thank God, a Catholic Reformation. And among the lights of the Catholic Reformation, surely one of the outstanding, except for whom I wouldn’t be here, was St. Ignatius. In other words, the Protestant revolution began and the date every self respecting Catholic should know when Martin Luther nailed those ninety-five thesis to the church door of the Castle of Wittenberg, October the thirty-first 1517. And that really is the birthday of Protestantism. So the origins of Protestantism go back to the day that Martin Luther nailed his ninety-five thesis to the church door of the chapel at the castle of Wittenberg in Germany. His ninety-five thesis had become to be called a ninety-five statements some merely challenging Catholic teaching, others openly denying even revealed Catholic Truth. It then began, I repeat, on the evening before the Feast of All Saints, and Halloween has become a clown’s day, an object of, well, of something to be laughed at because Martin Luther broke with the Catholic Church on that first Halloween of Protestantism. I repeat thirty-first of October 1517. From the very beginning, those who followed Martin Luther, and other leaders, as we’ll see, they called themselves Protestants, and the reason they called themselves Protestants because they protested. They protested against the attempt to reunify the then Roman Empire which had been, for generations, united by having one faith. Those then who protested against acceptance of a single faith in the Roman Empire became, well, those who protest. That’s what the word Protestant means – Protestors. And they’ve never been embarrassed by the name ever since. They have remained protestors. Given that definition of Protestantism, we’ve got many more Protestants than we find in the books of the Protestant denominations.

First Principle Form of Protestantism - Sola Scriptura What are the essentials of Protestantism? It is not to know what some of those essentials are, because in over four hundred years, going on five hundred years, they have remained I would say, quite constant, in other words, those basic premises of Protestantism have not basically changed. And in Latin that’s why they got started first sola scriptura: Scripture alone. How do we know God’s mind and will from Scripture alone? Sola scriptura, by Scripture alone. Only the written revealed word of God is necessary, not just for salvation, but to know everything that God wants us to both believe, and to do. It is all contained in the Bible. Historically, that position could not have, could not have been assumed, no way, until the discovery of print. Usually we assign about 14, 1465 as the beginning of the print age. And the first printed book, as I am sure we all know, was the – Bible. Well, Luther and his followers identified all of God’s revelation with that written book. As over the years, I’ve been telling people, the more bizarre, the more incredible, the stranger an idea is – talk about human nature – the more believers you are liable to get. Imagine claiming the law of God, revealed Truth, is in a written book. When until less than a century before the rise of Protestantism, there were no books in existence. There were manuscripts, but no books.

Second Principle Form of Protestantism - Solo Spiritu Second major premise of Protestantism, solo Spiritu, solo Spiritu. In Latin we see that’s the opposite case by the Spirit alone. This answers the question, how, how do we come to understand or interpret the revealed word of God? Revealed where? Revealed in the Scriptures. How by the Spirit, and meaning by the Holy Spirit alone? By the first premise saying that all of God’s Revelation is contained in the Scriptures. What did Protestantism exclude? Sacred Tradition!

By the second premise claiming that all you need is the Holy Spirit to explain or interpret God’s revealed Word. What did they do? They excluded the authority of the Church. As John Calvin made so plain in his writings, it is the same Holy Spirit Who inspired Jeremiah to write, well, his prophesies Who is at my disposal to enable me to understand Jeremiah. And you don’t need, you just don’t need, a Church to tell you what either Jeremiah, or Matthew, or John, or any other sacred writer, is saying.

Third Principle Form of Protestantism - Solo Gratia Thirdly, in Protestantism, another term taken from Latin, sola gratia, sola gratia. By grace alone are we saved. What do they mean by that phrase, sola gratia? That, as every Christian has everybody been Christian holds, we Catholics certainly hold, that we need God’s grace to be saved. But, does God’s grace alone save us, or do we have to both receive God’s grace and cooperate with that grace? Of course! Whereas according to, what I call classic Protestantism, the Protestantism that was first conceived, and in hundreds of volumes explained in depth by the founders of Protestantism. It is by grace alone and not, watch it, by good works. So that, even as Scripture alone is necessary for salvation and not Sacred Tradition, even as the Holy Spirit alone is needed to interpret the meaning of Sacred Scripture, and you don’t need the Authority of the Church, so you need only God’s grace, and not good works to be saved.

Fourth Principle of Protestantism - Sola Fide Fourth and last basic premise. Another Latin phrase sola fide, sola fide, by faith alone. What do they mean by faith alone? And the word for faith in Latin, is certainly fides, or the additive fide. By faith! But what did Luther and his followers do with the word fides or faith? Unlike the Catholic definition of faith, which is the assent of the intellect to everything which God has revealed. In other words, we hold that faith is the mind, the intellect, accepting assenting to everything which God has revealed. That’s the Catholic understanding, whereas, in Protestantism faith is not a virtue of the mind or intellect at all. It is a virtue of the will. Faith in Protestantism is identified with hope or trust. All I know is, I’ve told you I’m sure more than once having taught in six Protestant seminaries, my longest tenure was seven years on the faculty of the Lutheran School of Theology. You’d think they would have dropped me by the third day, but no, they didn’t. And one reason is because, first of all, I am so deeply sympathetic with the Protestants. I did tell you, I’m sure at least many of you, my mother lost her husband, my father. She just had me. Well we needed some means of support. Mother worked but that was not enough, so she took in boarders. And they were women. But I tell you, from the age of one to the age of sixteen, I was reared in an all women household. My dear men, you husbands, you want to know more about your wife, call me up sometime. Oh how much the Lord has taught me. That’s from infancy. Well, two that remained with us for fifteen years, were Judith and Susan. Two staunch Lutherans. I thought they were my sisters. They were good Christians, but they were sure not Catholic. So I learned all about Luther by the age of three. So I came to teach the Lutherans in Chicago, at Lutheran School of Theology. I knew much more, much more Lutheranism, than they did, far more. For I’d have flunked most of them for their ignorance of Protestantism. But in Protestantism, on this crucial fourth element, when they say sola fide, the word fide, is of course, is the Latin term for faith. And fides can mean, as you know, certainly in English, that words mean what people who use them want them to mean, that’s simple. In English by the way, in case nobody told you, you don’t need a dictionary. I have said the unabridged English dictionary, the editors we can no longer publish a dictionary that defines the meaning of words. No way! The best we can do is publish a dictionary which describes how words are used. Ok so, sola fide means by trust alone, and not how, and not by assenting with the mind to what God has revealed. For Protestants it does not really, really, make a difference whether Jesus Christ is really God or not. Six of Luther’s works have never been published and they will never be published, as long as there is a Lutheran left on earth. They’ll never be published. Kept in safety deposit boxes in Germany. One page after another, and the manuscript is of Martin Luther, Christ is described as and I am being very kind, as a lecherous sinner. No way, no way, that the Christ of Martin Luther could be the living God.

Premises of Protestantism Those are the four principles called the premises of Protestantism. My first book, is there a copy here? Oh yes. My first book, The Protestant Churches of America, dated October the 29th, 1956. And, in three years went to 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 printings, and two revisions. By the time I finished the manuscript the Protestants changed their religion. In any case, here’s what the Anglican Theological Review says about the book, I must have read it thirty years ago. “The attempted wholeness of the presentations which included historical, doctrinal, organizational and additional information is admirable.” unquote - The Anglican Theological Review says thanks. The book sold about a half a million copies. And it should be revised, what I need is more time. But, I love the Protestants and well they admire being liked, but they know that I know that Protestants are not Catholics. But let me tell you, in teaching in Protestant seminaries, lecturing to Protestant groups over the country, the one thing they want to make sure is, “Are you an authentic Catholic?” The last thing they want is a namby-pamby Catholic who is compromising his Catholicism with Protestantism. No, we want a bona fide Roman Catholic and they love you. And they told me how many times, maybe you know what we are protesting. Because, so many would become Catholics if only we knew more about who they are, and willing to take the time and reaching out to them who are so desperately in need of the full truth. Well having said that about Protestantism in general.

First Division of Protestantism - Lutheran Now the principle forms or divisions of Protestantism. Chronologically, the first branch or form of Protestantism, of course, was Lutheran. That’s where it all got started. What was distinct about Lutheranism from the beginning, and I would say has remained fairly constant over the centuries. Lutheranism has held on fairly constantly to what I would call the basics of Christian Revelation. In recent years in a country like ours, Lutheranism has become more and more, let’s say liberalized, but in general among the Lutherans there has been a conservatism which has not held up as well in other forms of Protestantism. Again in Lutheran Protestantism there has remained over the centuries, surprisingly in many forms of Lutheranism especially in the Scandinavian Lutheranism, Norwegian, and Swedish, an episcopate, and they trace their bishops back, back, to the 16th century. So there are Lutheran bishops. In fact, among some of these Lutheran bishops, they sincerely believe, that they are successors of the Apostles.

What is one truth of the Catholic faith that Luther dropped immediately on breaking with the Catholic Church, and that in my judgment, is the heart of the crisis in the Catholic Church today. Martin Luther had lost his faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. Having been a priest for 15 years as he was, he had no illusions about what the Catholic Church believes. That a priest validly ordained, has the power to change bread and wine into the Living Jesus Christ. Luther then, having lost his own faith, could not pass that on because he no longer believed it, and yet, he had been a Catholic for too many years not to hold on to, strange, to the term transubstantiation. Luther professed to believe in transubstantiation. Well how can you have transubstantiation if you don’t have a Real Presence which is made possible by the words of Consecration by validly ordained priests? Although Martin Luther, even though he might use the word transubstantiation, he coined the word consubstantiation. In other words, even where he would retain the word transubstantiation, he really meant and spent thousands of words explaining what he meant by consubstantiation. Transubstantiation as we know, means, that what had been bread and wine in substance, are changed into the Whole Jesus Christ. So what becomes present on the altar is no longer, no longer the substance of bread and wine, that’s gone. By replacing the substance of bread and wine is both the substance of Christ’s Living Body and Blood and all the physical properties of Christ’s living humanity. For Luther has the word consubstantiation. “Con” being the equivalent of quo in Latin, the substance of bread and wine remain but they then remain along with, if you please, Christ’s Body and Blood. Then he invented, what we’ve touched on I think more than once in class, without directly dealing with it as we are doing here. He invented what he called, there was no theory for him, it was an article of the Lutheran faith. What he called the ubiquity of Christ’s humanity. The ubiquity of Christ’s humanity. Ubiquity comes from the Latin, ubique, u-b-i-q-u-e in Latin. Ubiquity is simply u-b-i-q-u-i-t-y, ubiquity, which means the everywhereness, the everywhereness of Christ’s humanity.

I cannot begin to begin to tell you how deeply these Protestant ideas have infected the thinking of many well-intentioned, but poorly educated Catholics. What do we believe takes place at what we call transubstantiation? At the moment of transubstantiation what having been the substance of bread and wine cease to be there. Accidents, or properties, of the bread and the wine stay. What replaces the substance of bread and wine, is the Whole Christ. Remember, the Totus Christus, the whole Christ, which means the whole of His Divinity and the whole of His humanity, but for one person, and consequently, there is no such thing as the ubiquity of Christ’s humanity, that in plain Anglo-Saxon, is a lie. That’s spelled l-i-e, that’s a lie. When God became man, He began it truly young. Where was His humanity? When He was conceived in Mary’s womb, His humanity was in Mary’s womb. On Christmas morning, where was His humanity? Well where else, in Her arms. Christ’s humanity was, wherever, well, His human nature His living body, with His limbs, His face, His hands, feet, wherever therefore, Christ the whole Christ was present, was present also His humanity. But don’t you dare say that Christ’s humanity ever was or now is everywhere. Absolutely NO! What then took place on the first Holy Thursday night? What happened bread and wine became Christ truly present with His humanity, keep after that, keep after that. The hundreds of priests that I’ve taught, and there are many confused priests in the Church today, how well I know. The key to grasping our faith of the Real Presence is to know that Christ’s humanity is not everywhere. Christ’s humanity is present only where? Where He is present as the Incarnate Son of God in human form. On earth where is Christ’s humanity? Could somebody answer that? You will make my day more than worthwhile. Where is Christ’s humanity present? (Person answers: In The Blessed Sacrament) In The Blessed Sacrament. Viva! That’s where Christ’s humanity is present, no where else, no where else on earth and in heaven and elsewhere. (Person asks: Or in heaven or and in heaven?). Please. (Person asks: He is present only in The Blessed Sacrament on earth and in Heaven?). Yes. (Person speaking: His humanity and in Heaven His glorified body in Heaven). Yes, same glorified humanity that’s in Heaven is on earth. And He’s present on earth in His humanity only because He rose from the dead and ascended to His Heavenly Father, and then because Christ instituted the Blessed Sacrament, which is the sacrament of Christ’s continued Presence of His humanity. Keep that humanity, keep that humanity. I believe there is so much confusion, wide spread confusion.

Consequently, back to where we were regarding Lutheranism. That for Luther, having been a priest, and never of course losing his priesthood, you would expect one of the key features, call it a feature of Lutheran Protestantism, would be precisely why Luther was distinct. He was a well educated priest who gave up his faith. But we go on, still on Luther, because the stage that Luther set has been pretty much colored by his thinking over the centuries. In English there are 54 volumes to the complete works of Martin Luther, 54 volumes. And I’ve told people, I’m sure many of you, you can spare yourself the trouble of reading those 54 volumes, that’s a lot of reading, a lot of pages, it’s more simple to just know what besides what I’ve just said, mainly, his denial of the Real Presence of Christ, His humanity in the Holy Eucharist, and he invented the idea of Christ universal humanity. Christ already is everywhere as man, and so nothing really happens at what we call the consecration. But, there is another distinctive feature in Lutheran Protestantism. And that is, for Luther having struggled as, your author will point out, having struggled with his passions, especially his passion of lust. Martin Luther had a very strong sex passion. And, he claims, though once you get to know Luther’s life you realize just a claim.

Among other things Luther stopped doing was praying. One of the letters that he wrote was one to his sister, which he told her I’ve got so much work to do I don’t have time even to say my office. In any case, after years of what he called struggle with his passions, he decided it’s no use, and he decided what was wrong was not Martin Luther, but the Catholic Church. That the Catholic Church is mistaken in thinking that we, somehow we, can contribute to our either sanctification or to our control of our lower drives. No, said Luther, it is all up to God. If God wants….

Always a sin. Omnia qua ego facio son semper pecatum. All the things that I do are always a sin. That’s Martin Luther. And that then is the second cardinal feature of Lutheran Protestantism what we’ve come to call the total depravity of human nature. Human nature is so depraved you couldn’t be more depraved in theological language than to claim as Luther did that everything we do is always a sin. That’s pretty depraved. And of course the consequences of these positions, after almost five hundred years have been disastrous.

Second Division of Protestantism - Calvinism Now the second by the way, and read what you’ve got in your pages. I also recommend that you get a copy of my book, Religions of the World. The book needs to be reprinted; all I need again is time. After God’s grace what I most need is time. But Religions of the World is about sixteen long chapters. One of the chapters, on Protestantism, has a very carefully worked out synthesis of Protestantism, both historically and doctrinally. It is the fruit of a lifetime of research into Protestantism and condenses all the important things that anyone should know including by the way, Protestants, by their own Protestantism.

The second major branch of Protestantism is Calvinism. In the United States it generally is in two forms, either as Presbyterianism, or as one of the Reformed Churches, so-called Reformed Churches. But at root it is Calvinism. We are not sure that Calvin and Luther ever physically met during their lifetimes, Calvin in France, Luther in Germany. What we do know is that Calvin, having been a seminarian, never ordained, was a genius. To really, really know, the best, and the sense of the deepest and the most devastating of Protestantism, there are the two volumes of John Calvin called the Institutes of the Christian Religion, Institutes of the Christian Religion. It is really a summa theologica of Protestantism. Because where Luther may be called the prophet of Protestantism, Calvin was the theologian. Calvin really thought through Protestantism. His ideas are clear and they are devastating. You couldn’t be, you cannot be, more contrary to Catholic Christianity than John Calvin. What John Calvin bought was two ancient heresies. He bought the heresy of Pelagianism and he bought the heresy of Manichaeism, which is a strange combination. Original Pelagianism, as you may know, claimed you don’t need grace. All you need is your own, your own will to be saved. I don’t mean now in Manichaeism you don’t need your own will, all you need is God’s grace. Calvin in his genius managed to combine those two that seem to be contrary, not to say contradictory heresies. For John Calvin, many you might say are Luther’s ideas, for John Calvin in the last analysis who will be saved – those whom God has predestined for salvation. Would anybody else be saved? No. And therefore, basic to John Calvin, is the absolute denial of man’s free will. Now ironically, Calvin writes for pages and pages in his summa, the entries of the Christian religion about the human will. John Calvin is the genius who created the modern world with it’s denial of human freedom. If there is one basic error in the modern world this is it. And by now you find it, in every psychology book in the English speaking world, every sociology book in the English speaking world, you find it burnt in the minds of children from infancy, what shapes our lives our heredity our environment and our education. And in this sense, Calvin improved on Pelagius. Pelagius believed really in a true free will. Calvin claims that everything in this world is determined by forces outside of man. Take a man like William James, one of the three, I will say, three most influential philosophers of the American mind. Volume after volume all allegedly on the free will. There is no real freedom left. It’s not I who determine what I want to do. I am already shaped. I repeat by my heredity, by my environment and by my education. Does heredity shape one’s character? Sure. Does environment shape one’s character? Sure. Does education shape one’s character? Sure does. But is that is that the ultimate reason, watch this, is that the ultimate reason why we should ever choose anything and know that the only problem is, and I say this through almost 50 years of priestly experience, I’m afraid most Americans seldom use their own free will. Their lives are shaped and they want to have it shaped. And beyond that shaping are those, who have, well, shaped the modern mind, going back and John Calvin is a genius. And John Calvin with all his opposition to any true human freedom was a sworn enemy of the Catholic Church, who had been studying for the priesthood. And among his hatreds, there was none worse, than the Sacrifice of the Mass. And I think in your pages that I gave you there is a picture, yes, page 443. The Martyrs of Gorcan. In 1572 the Calvinists seized 17 priests and 2 lay brothers in Gorcan, threw them into prison, truly mutilated them, and finally hanged them for refusing to deny their belief in the Real Presence and the Papal Primacy, and in that order. They are known as the Martyrs of Gorcan. They were canonized in 1865. The Society of Jesus has martyrs, priests murdered while offering Mass, for claiming that a Mass obtains grace. How idolatrous can you be? Obtains grace, and that your life is not, as they claim, absolutely predestined.


TOPICS: Catholic; Orthodox Christian
KEYWORDS: catholiclist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last
To: bornacatholic

bookmark this pleasant exchange between genuine wits


41 posted on 11/15/2006 2:44:02 PM PST by nkycincinnatikid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
If language has any meaning, then Protestantism represents those theological positions taken by the Reformers of the 16th and 17th Centuries. To use a political analogy, conservatism in the American sense represent a set of political beliefs rooted in the political views of the Founding Fathers and defined in the post-World War II era by men such as Russell Kirk, William Buckley, Frank Meyer, Henry Hazlett, etc. Someone may call himself a conservative, but if he is an advocate of socialized medicine, gun control, etc., he falsely labels himself.

You have given a definition of Catholic based on adherence to the Papacy and its entire teachings over time. Why are the Eastern Orthodox and High Church Anglicans not Catholic, even though they call themselves by that name? Or for that matter, dissidents on the left (liberation theologians) or the right (Feeneyites, Lefevrists) who call themselves Catholic? (In fact, the right dissidents are closer theologically to the canons of Trent than are modern Catholics.) By your definition, however, none of these groups are not Catholic because of their nonadherence to the Papacy and the entire body of teachings.

You have given what you consider a valid identification of Catholicism based on your reasonable definition of the term, not any authority you have. I have given a definition of Protestantism based on my observation, which is supported by historical context.

42 posted on 11/15/2006 2:58:14 PM PST by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic

Dear bornacatholic,

As a Once, Current, and Future Officer of the Knights of Columbus, I hereby dispose upon you dispensation from the Rule of No-Drinking-On-A-School-Night. However, all bottles opened in light of this dispensation must be emptied before the evening's end, or dispensation is retroactively revoked.


DGK S/K sitetest, PGK


43 posted on 11/15/2006 3:10:00 PM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR
Unitarianism was a theological movement that arose in Britain and America in the 18th Century. It had its precursors in the days of the Church Fathers as well as in the Reformation era, Michael Servetus, for example. The movement began as a rejection of Trinitarianism, and later expanded to deny the divine inspiration of the Bible and other core Christian doctrines, such as the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, and the Substitutionary Atonement. All of the major threads of the Reformation were Trinitarian, and the Lutheran, Reformed, and Anglican churches recognized the authority of the first six ecumenical councils, which defined the character of the Trinity and the fully divine, fully human nature of Jesus Christ. The Reformers universally believed in the divine inspiration of Scripture.

By abandoning the theological positions of the Reformers in these areas, which in these respects are in entire agreement with Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, the Unitarians cannot be defined as Protestant.

44 posted on 11/15/2006 3:10:48 PM PST by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu; Augustinian monk; ksen; Lord_Calvinus; Gamecock; HarleyD; Forest Keeper; wmfights; ...
This post filed under Roswell/Fake Moon Landing

LOL. So now we're supposed to just take what they say on faith.

But we're not supposed to take what Scripture says on faith.

Interesting distinction.

45 posted on 11/15/2006 3:47:37 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: stfassisi
I do not understand why Fr. Hardon ties Calvin to Pelagianism. Does he mean that Calvin goes to the opposite extreme? Calvin strongly opposed Pelagianism.

And how exactly, does Fr. Hardon think Calvin is guilty of Manicheanism? Thanks.

-A8

46 posted on 11/15/2006 4:28:15 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
Calvin was a spin master Read this again... Calvin in his genius managed to combine those two that seem to be contrary, not to say contradictory heresies. For John Calvin, many you might say are Luther’s ideas, for John Calvin in the last analysis who will be saved – those whom God has predestined for salvation. Would anybody else be saved? No. And therefore, basic to John Calvin, is the absolute denial of man’s free will. Now ironically, Calvin writes for pages and pages in his summa, the entries of the Christian religion about the human will. John Calvin is the genius who created the modern world with it’s denial of human freedom

I,m sorry I have not participated more in this thread,I,m on my way to my daughters swim championships and will be back on Sunday.

47 posted on 11/15/2006 6:04:04 PM PST by stfassisi ("Above all gifts that Christ gives his beloved is that of overcoming self"St Francis Assisi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: stfassisi
I read it, but I don't see how the denial of free will is Pelagian or Manichean.

-A8

48 posted on 11/15/2006 6:38:20 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: stfassisi

Seriously, this whole article is pure garbage. I've not seen such an intellectually dishonest, academically bereft polemic in a long time. If one is going to speak so strongly against something they ought to at least be able to accurately describe it.


49 posted on 11/15/2006 7:08:33 PM PST by Frumanchu (Historical Revisionism: When you're tired of being on the losing side of history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: tmp02

No, the Word hasn't changed, our interpretations of it have -- whether right or wrong...


50 posted on 11/15/2006 7:50:45 PM PST by Cronos ("Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant" - Omar Ahmed, CAIR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR
From what I understand of the various sects, Protestants are those Western groups who have broken away either directly from the Catholic Church, or from those who broke from the Catholic Church or who broke from those who broke from those who broke from The Church, or etc. AND maintain some idea of Apostolic Succession, Trinitarianism etc.

Baptists are "evangelicals" as they reject Apostolic succession, but they are Trinitarians

Unitarians aren't really even Christians as they reject the basic tenets of Christianity and some seem akin to Judaism, while others are so wishy-washy, it's possible to just call them "peace dude" types. Mormons are a different matter.
51 posted on 11/15/2006 8:04:21 PM PST by Cronos ("Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant" - Omar Ahmed, CAIR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.

I'd also separate Catholic from catholic -- Eastern Orthodox ARE part of the Apostolic Church and so were many Anglican Churches. Political dissent does not validate a church being considered completely separate, but complete 180 degree differences in theology, DO, as in the case of Calvinistic beliefs versus Church beliefs


52 posted on 11/15/2006 8:08:38 PM PST by Cronos ("Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant" - Omar Ahmed, CAIR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu
I wouldn't say that. Some of the things he says are true. But I do think that his criticisms of Calvin seem to be unjustifiable. I suspect that his reasoning would have been clearer if someone had asked him to clarify what he meant.

Honestly, when I read this, it seems as though he was a very old man, not fully aware of the way his words are coming out. I have been around older professors like this; sometimes they aren't aware of the way the words come out, and what they meant to say becomes clear only if you ask them to clarify.

-A8

53 posted on 11/15/2006 9:49:21 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8; Cronos; bornacatholic
I read it, but I don't see how the denial of free will is Pelagian or Manichean.

Because there is a school of thought that everything that is not Latin rite Roman Catholic has some sort of influence from either Pelagius or Mani.

BAC, I would like to know what you are referring to. If there was a movement to "hide" Luther's documents, it must have failed miserably.

54 posted on 11/16/2006 6:53:01 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
I'd also separate Catholic from catholic -- Eastern Orthodox ARE part of the Apostolic Church and so were many Anglican Churches. Political dissent does not validate a church being considered completely separate, but complete 180 degree differences in theology, DO, as in the case of Calvinistic beliefs versus Church beliefs

While I agree that the Eastern Orthodox are an apostolic church, I do not think that the Anglican are considered apostolic - since they broke from apostolic succession when Henry 8 made himself the visible ruler of the Church over the Pope. Anglican orders are not accepted by the Catholic Church, as far as I know. Thus, I believe the political dissent CAN be considered a means of breaking from apostolicity. It would be interesting to discuss why Anglican orders are not valid, while Orthodox are - considering they both broke from Rome. Perhaps it is because no Orthodox has usurped the Pope's position... Regards

55 posted on 11/16/2006 6:57:01 AM PST by jo kus (Humility is present when one debases oneself without being obliged to do so- St.Chrysostom; Phil 2:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
You have given what you consider a valid identification of Catholicism based on your reasonable definition of the term, not any authority you have.

* I gave you a Teaching of the Catholic Church, not my personal opinion.

I have given a definition of Protestantism based on my observation, which is supported by historical context.

* You think you did. But, you didn't. The "reformers" could not agree among themselves as to what were and what were not beliefs one was under a moral obligation to accept. Luther, for instance, condemed those who disagreed with his personal opinions. Like all Heresiarchs, he substituted himself for the Church.

That being true, your persosnal opinions as to what protestantism is is just that, a personal opinion and, therefore, not normative

56 posted on 11/16/2006 7:32:18 AM PST by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
Lumen Gentium

This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, (12*) which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd,(74) and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority,(75) which He erected for all ages as "the pillar and mainstay of the truth".(76) This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13*) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.

...9. At all times and in every race God has given welcome to whosoever fears Him and does what is right.(85) God, however, does not make men holy and save them merely as individuals, without bond or link between one another. Rather has it pleased Him to bring men together as one people, a people which acknowledges Him in truth and serves Him in holiness. He therefore chose the race of Israel as a people unto Himself. With it He set up a covenant. Step by step He taught and prepared this people, making known in its history both Himself and the decree of His will and making it holy unto Himself. All these things, however, were done by way of preparation and as a figure of that new and perfect covenant, which was to be ratified in Christ, and of that fuller revelation which was to be given through the Word of God Himself made flesh. "Behold the days shall come saith the Lord, and I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel, and with the house of Judah . . . I will give my law in their bowels, and I will write it in their heart, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people . . . For all of them shall know Me, from the least of them even to the greatest, saith the Lord.(86) Christ instituted this new covenant, the new testament, that is to say, in His Blood,(87) calling together a people made up of Jew and gentile, making them one, not according to the flesh but in the Spirit. This was to be the new People of God. For those who believe in Christ, who are reborn not from a perishable but from an imperishable seed through the word of the living God,(88) not from the flesh but from water and the Holy Spirit,(89) are finally established as "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people . . . who in times past were not a people, but are now the people of God".(90)

That messianic people has Christ for its head, "Who was delivered up for our sins, and rose again for our justification",(91) and now, having won a name which is above all names, reigns in glory in heaven. The state of this people is that of the dignity and freedom of the sons of God, in whose hearts the Holy Spirit dwells as in His temple. Its law is the new commandment to love as Christ loved us.(92) Its end is the kingdom of God, which has been begun by God Himself on earth, and which is to be further extended until it is brought to perfection by Him at the end of time, when Christ, our life,(93) shall appear, and "creation itself will be delivered from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the sons of God".(94) So it is that that messianic people, although it does not actually include all men, and at times may look like a small flock, is nonetheless a lasting and sure seed of unity, hope and salvation for the whole human race. Established by Christ as a communion of life, charity and truth, it is also used by Him as an instrument for the redemption of all, and is sent forth into the whole world as the light of the world and the salt of the earth.(95)... Israel according to the flesh, which wandered as an exile in the desert, was already called the Church of God.(96) So likewise the new Israel which while living in this present age goes in search of a future and abiding city (97) is called the Church of Christ.(98) For He has bought it for Himself with His blood,(99) has filled it with His Spirit and provided it with those means which befit it as a visible and social union. God gathered together as one all those who in faith look upon Jesus as the author of salvation and the source of unity and peace, and established them as the Church that for each and all it may be the visible sacrament of this saving unity. (1*) While it transcends all limits of time and confines of race, the Church is destined to extend to all regions of the earth and so enters into the history of mankind. Moving forward through trial and tribulation, the Church is strengthened by the power of God's grace, which was promised to her by the Lord, so that in the weakness of the flesh she may not waver from perfect fidelity, but remain a bride worthy of her Lord, and moved by the Holy Spirit may never cease to renew herself, until through the Cross she arrives at the light which knows no setting.

....

11. It is through the sacraments and the exercise of the virtues that the sacred nature and organic structure of the priestly community is brought into operation. Incorporated in the Church through baptism, the faithful are destined by the baptismal character for the worship of the Christian religion; reborn as sons of God they must confess before men the faith which they have received from God through the Church (4*). They are more perfectly bound to the Church by the sacrament of Confirmation, and the Holy Spirit endows them with special strength so that they are more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith, both by word and by deed, as true witnesses of Christ (5*). Taking part in the eucharistic sacrifice, which is the fount and apex of the whole Christian life, they offer the Divine Victim to God, and offer themselves along with It.(6*) Thus both by reason of the offering and through Holy Communion all take part in this liturgical service, not indeed, all in the same way but each in that way which is proper to himself. Strengthened in Holy Communion by the Body of Christ, they then manifest in a concrete way that unity of the people of God which is suitably signified and wondrously brought about by this most august sacrament.

... 13. All men are called to belong to the new people of God. Wherefore this people, while remaining one and only one, is to be spread throughout the whole world and must exist in all ages, so that the decree of God's will may be fulfilled. In the beginning God made human nature one and decreed that all His children, scattered as they were, would finally be gathered together as one. (117) It was for this purpose that God sent His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things,(118) that be might be teacher, king and priest of all, the head of the new and universal people of the sons of God. For this too God sent the Spirit of His Son as Lord and Life- giver. He it is who brings together the whole Church and each and every one of those who believe, and who is the well-spring of their unity in the teaching of the apostles and in fellowship, in the breaking of bread and in prayers.(119)

It follows that though there are many nations there is but one people of God, which takes its citizens from every race, making them citizens of a kingdom which is of a heavenly rather than of an earthly nature. All the faithful, scattered though they be throughout the world, are in communion with each other in the Holy Spirit, and so, he who dwells in Rome knows that the people of India are his members"(9*). Since the kingdom of Christ is not of this world(120) the Church or people of God in establishing that kingdom takes nothing away from the temporal welfare of any people. On the contrary it fosters and takes to itself, insofar as they are good, the ability, riches and customs in which the genius of each people expresses itself. Taking them to itself it purifies, strengthens, elevates and ennobles them. The Church in this is mindful that she must bring together the nations for that king to whom they were given as an inheritance,(121) and to whose city they bring gifts and offerings.(122) This characteristic of universality which adorns the people of God is a gift from the Lord Himself. By reason of it, the Catholic Church strives constantly and with due effect to bring all humanity and all its possessions back to its source In Christ, with Him as its head and united in His Spirit. (10*)

In virtue of this catholicity each individual part contributes through its special gifts to the good of the other parts and of the whole Church. Through the common sharing of gifts and through the common effort to attain fullness in unity, the whole and each of the parts receive increase. Not only, then, is the people of God made up of different peoples but in its inner structure also it is composed of various ranks. This diversity among its members arises either by reason of their duties, as is the case with those who exercise the sacred ministry for the good of their brethren, or by reason of their condition and state of life, as is the case with those many who enter the religious state and, tending toward holiness by a narrower path, stimulate their brethren by their example. Moreover, within the Church particular Churches hold a rightful place; these Churches retain their own traditions, without in any way opposing the primacy of the Chair of Peter, which presides over the whole assembly of charity (11*) and protects legitimate differences, while at the same time assuring that such differences do not hinder unity but rather contribute toward it. Between all the parts of the Church there remains a bond of close communion whereby they share spiritual riches, apostolic workers and temporal resources. For the members of the people of God are called to share these goods in common, and of each of the Churches the words of the Apostle hold good: "According to the gift that each has received, administer it to one another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God".(123)

All men are called to be part of this catholic unity of the people of God which in promoting universal peace presages it. And there belong to or are related to it in various ways, the Catholic faithful, all who believe in Christ, and indeed the whole of mankind, for all men are called by the grace of God to salvation.

14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."(12*) All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.(13*)

57 posted on 11/16/2006 7:43:38 AM PST by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Unitarians believe in, at most, one God


58 posted on 11/16/2006 7:44:30 AM PST by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: jo kus

You are right, brother. Only ones which have preserved Apostolic Sucession and the Eucharist are Churches. Of course, that includes the Orthodox. All the other Christians are really members of communities of believers. They are not members of a Church, properly speaking


59 posted on 11/16/2006 7:48:04 AM PST by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: redgolum

FR. Hardon was the one referrring to those writings


60 posted on 11/16/2006 7:48:57 AM PST by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last

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.

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