I am talking about history, about human beings acting in historyTrent took place within history and even as its was adjourning war was breaking in France between the Catholics and Huguenots, Elizabeths government was establishing its control over the Catholics in England, a revolution was breaking out in the Netherlands against Spanish rule no little by religious differences. All of this the consequence of the Reformer split with Rome. You can talk about spiritual differences, but that was not the reality of the Reformation. It was made possible by political leaders and because they chose sides in this schism created by the Reformation, war—bloody war— ensued. All of this could have been avoided if charity had prevailed. It did not. Te true Christians on each side were affected. United in Christ , they may have been, but not in the Church.
posted on 03/19/2013 10:51:33 AM PDT
RE: I am talking about history, about human beings acting in historyTrent took place within history and even as its was adjourning war was breaking in France between the Catholics and Huguenots
And I am also referring to history. Let’s ignore the war for the meantime. The question remains -— are the anathemas of Trent and Vatican I only for those whose citizens are at war? Or are they about SPIRITUAL differences?
But let’s set aside France and the Huguenots for the moment... here’s a direct question for you...
Based on YOUR UNDERSTANDING...is a professed Christian who does not acknowledge the Pope as Primate of the Christian church TODAY still under the Vatican I anathema or not?
A simple yes or no will suffice.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson