|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Reformation after 500 years
|
Clutch
Apprentice
# 18827
|
Posted
From The Guardian Online:
quote:
Five centuries after the Reformation triggered a series of long and bloody religious wars across Europe, modern-day Protestants and Catholics believe they have more in common theologically than they do differences, and most would be willing to accept each other as neighbours and family members.
[edited to remove all but the opening paragraph of copyright material]
[ 31. August 2017, 16:45: Message edited by: Alan Cresswell ]
--------------------
Proud liberal socialist,proud progressive Anglo-Catholic and proud to be a conservative's bane.
Posts: 21 | Registered: Aug 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
And your point is?
Or, IOW, what would you like us to discuss?
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Clutch
Apprentice
# 18827
|
Posted
My apologies if I miss understood sharing an interesting article required me to state a point off the bat. I must have missed that part of the rules.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I thought it interesting that we've come from a crisis of faith to schism to wars to gradual acceptance over 500 years, even more in common then distinct.
My bad if I share interesting topics in the future then.
--------------------
Proud liberal socialist,proud progressive Anglo-Catholic and proud to be a conservative's bane.
Posts: 21 | Registered: Aug 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
Not bad that you share interesting topics. I can see from your profile that you're new to posting on the ship.
It's just the the "done thing" here would typically be to include a link to the article, rather than copy and paste a large chunk, perhaps give a point of view (controversial allowed, even welcome) and then invite others to comment, contradict or otherwise add to a discussion. It just helps if, when giving an initial post, you give an indication of the kind of direction you want to the discussion to go in.
Welcome to the ship, by the way! ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Clutch
Apprentice
# 18827
|
Posted
I was actually hoping this would generate debate rather then relying on myself to state an opinion of my own.
But fine....
I read the article and note that as far as we've come, is the Church (meaning the whole Christian community) truly reformed fully? I would almost say that the Refomation while moving away from it's early issues isn't actually over.
Kinda why this place exists in a manner of speaking. LGBTQ issues, women rights, the social gospel, the battle with literalism and so on are still prevalent in the Christian faith as well as dealing with what we called at one time heathens or pagans or the irreligious.
So I suppose a newer question is the new form of the reformation a battle between this so-called conservative outlook as expressed by the most part by Evangelicals of all stripes and the progressive, modern outlook?
--------------------
Proud liberal socialist,proud progressive Anglo-Catholic and proud to be a conservative's bane.
Posts: 21 | Registered: Aug 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Purgatory is our space for serious discussion (yes, really). As such, we like it if people make comments (especially when starting a thread) that are designed to get people discussing something.
In addition, we don't like people posting illegal material - which includes something someone else has written and holds copyright on (see our Commandment 7). Therefore, I have deleted all but the opening paragraph of the Guardian piece and inserted a link to the full text.
Hopefully you will soon learn the ropes and settle down with us as we foolishly sail the seas.
Alan
Ship of Fools Admin
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
According to this article, the Roman Catholics have won the Reformation debate after 500 years:
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2017/08/31/poll-most-protestants-and-catholics-believe-faith-and-works-are-necessary
A fairer assessment is that Reformation polemics meant that people on both Catholic and Protestant sides took positions that if taken too extremely, were severe misreadings of the Gospel. Yes, God's grace is unmerited and gracious, independent of our own good works, but that doesn't mean that good works are entirely unnecessary.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
I think it really boils down to the fact that Grace is not a syllogism: Having faith does mean that you need to act out that faith, to 'put your money where your mouth is'.
But the reverse is not true, shoveling money, goods or other things at a problem in an attempt to 'buy your way out of sin' as it were, is wrong, that is not how Grace works. Sadly, that sort of degeneration is what Luther railed against.
But again, there were many more dimensions to the Reformation than Luther, and many more outstanding issues.
And I believe the Prots won on the use of the Vernacular. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Clutch:
I would almost say that the Refomation while moving away from it's early issues isn't actually over.
Kinda why this place exists in a manner of speaking. LGBTQ issues, women rights, the social gospel, the battle with literalism and so on are still prevalent in the Christian faith as well as dealing with what we called at one time heathens or pagans or the irreligious.
So I suppose a newer question is the new form of the reformation a battle between this so-called conservative outlook as expressed by the most part by Evangelicals of all stripes and the progressive, modern outlook?
I don't see it as a 'battle' as such, principally because freedom of religion is more or less a given in much of Western Christendom. This wasn't true in Luther's time. Conservative, moderate, progressive, practising, nominal or apostate; nowadays it's all possible, and there's very little that any clerical hierarchy can do about it.
Moreover, there's the argument that the Protestant Reformation actually created this state of affairs, that it produced a highly individualised sensibility towards religion. It gave each person the freedom, even the duty, to follow his or her own understanding of the Holy Spirit - or the light of one's own conscience - wherever it might lead. This has led to progressive forms of faith, but it can also lead to strict, sectarian forms as well.
I'm not a specialist by any means, but I lean towards church-sect theory as an explanation for churches with different levels of religious conservatism, or strictness. Basically, it posits that there's always going to be a spectrum of churches. Churches tend to become less conservative over time, but you're never going to have a totality of highly progressive churches, because there will always be people who don't find that kind of church psychologically satisfying. The precise nature of the mix will depend on the society and era in question.
All this being the case, the Reformation was never going to lead to a world full of happily united, utterly progressive Christians, divided only by various quirky traditions, and theological distinctions of interest only to scholars. So I don't think it makes much sense to suggest that the Reformation didn't take us in a sufficiently liberal direction.
[ 31. August 2017, 23:32: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
I think it is mistaken to equate the Reformers' notion of Sola Scriptura with later fundamentalist views of the infallibility or inerrancy of Scripture.
At the heart of the Reformation is the faithfulness to the Gospel that Jesus originally taught to his disciples. The Reformation critique of the Medieval Church is that its' focus on indulgences, the cult of the Saints, the ritual of the Mass, obscured the message of the Gospel: principally, the love of God shown to humanity, revealed in the saving work of Jesus Christ.
IMHO, an insistence on the inerrancy/infallibility of Scripture that does not lead to this principal message of God's gracious and abundant love in Christ would be just as heretical and idolatrous as any medieval indulgence given that ignored the central meaning of the gospel.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I think it is mistaken to equate the Reformers' notion of Sola Scriptura with later fundamentalist views of the infallibility or inerrancy of Scripture.
But did the notion the individual could read for themselves lead to it? Or were those interpretations always there but kept in check by the interpretations of the Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, etc.?
I really like what you said about extremes, Anglican_Brat. It does seem there has been a move to the centre in many places, and reactions to this via fundamentalist and liberal churches.
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
And I believe the Prots won on the use of the Vernacular.
Deo gratias! ("Thanks be to God!")
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
wabale
Shipmate
# 18715
|
Posted
Some years ago, while teaching A Level Tudor History, I sat through a lecture by Eamon Duffy. He showed us some slides of the pictures of saints that a congregation in East Anglia had commissioned for their church, actually after Edward Vl’s government had ordered all such pictures to be removed! He remarked that the men who carried out these orders tore out the eyes of the saints concerned, on the picture that is. ‘What kind of people would do that?’ the Professor thundered, as I sank back as far as I could into my seat.
The following year the same Forum had a guest speaker who basically seemed to be there to remind us that there was also a Protestant point of view: clearly I was not the only one who had been slightly traumatised the year before.
I welcome the way Protestants and Catholics can talk about the many things that unite us, but I would never underestimate the possibilities for bitter argument flaring up, where they involve cultural differences quite as much as when the issues are religious.
One of the unexpected results of decline in religious belief in the UK, is that Roman Catholic scholars (and very often scholars who were lapsed Catholics) rewrote Tudor History in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Up till then the prevailing History was Protestant. So, for example, Mary l is now generally considered as effective as Elizabeth (if you consider just the first few years of Elizabeth’s reign). Had Mary l lived on … no I mustn’t go there …
Posts: 74 | From: Essex, United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by wabale:
I welcome the way Protestants and Catholics can talk about the many things that unite us, but I would never underestimate the possibilities for bitter argument flaring up, where they involve cultural differences quite as much as when the issues are religious.
I'm wondering if the openness and the convergence of views is rooted in those countries where significant numbers of Protestants and Catholics have lived alongside each other for a few centuries.
And that if you look at the views of Catholics in Catholic-dominated Mediterranean countries and Protestants in Protestant-dominated Scandinavian countries then there's rather less good news.
?
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
wabale: quote:
Had Mary l lived on … no I mustn’t go there …
...England and Wales might have ended up as an outpost of the Spanish Empire...
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
wabale: quote:
Had Mary l lived on … no I mustn’t go there …
...England and Wales might have ended up as an outpost of the Spanish Empire...
Which would probably save us from Bexit
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
It might, but we might have been more like Belgium (the Spanish Netherlands).
Or we might have had a colossal religious war.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
wabale
Shipmate
# 18715
|
Posted
It’s just too tempting, isn’t it, to pluck from the tree of antihistory! But I’ll try to stick with the history. I have pointed out earlier that it was probably the long war with Spain 1585 - 1604 that demonised Spain and Philip in English eyes ever since.
However, our negotiators were pretty suspicious of Philip when drawing up the treaty of marriage between him and Mary. It was anticipated that the heir of Philip and Mary would succeed to England and Burgundy, i.e. the Netherlands and Belgium (!) but not Spain.
It is also worth pointing out that the ‘new media’ played a huge part in stoking up religious conflict during the Reformation, with tracts and salacious cartoons being printed by the ton. This turned what would normally have been a civilized discussion among scholars into something new, and something Luther probably didn’t anticipate.
Posts: 74 | From: Essex, United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
So 'fake news' may well be nothing new!
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by wabale:
It’s just too tempting, isn’t it, to pluck from the tree of antihistory! But I’ll try to stick with the history. I have pointed out earlier that it was probably the long war with Spain 1585 - 1604 that demonised Spain and Philip in English eyes ever since.
However, our negotiators were pretty suspicious of Philip when drawing up the treaty of marriage between him and Mary. It was anticipated that the heir of Philip and Mary would succeed to England and Burgundy, i.e. the Netherlands and Belgium (!) but not Spain.
It is also worth pointing out that the ‘new media’ played a huge part in stoking up religious conflict during the Reformation, with tracts and salacious cartoons being printed by the ton. This turned what would normally have been a civilized discussion among scholars into something new, and something Luther probably didn’t anticipate.
At the popular level, the austerities of Edward VI were not particularly well received, and Mary was generally welcomed on accession. Not so popular by her death though, which raises the issue of what may have happened had she approached matters more as Elizabeth did.
Yes, I know, hypotheticals are so tempting!
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
The Marian Restoration was not well-received everywhere, but does indeed raise the interesting question of what might have happened, if the Queen had lived longer.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
So 'fake news' may well be nothing new!
IJ
As it wasn't from Germany's Thirty Years War which helped start the 1st English Civil War in the following century.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What, Mary I lived in the C17th? Or the 1st English Civil War was in the C16th?
[ 03. September 2017, 12:45: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
About the only two issues that continue to divide the members of the Lutheran World Federation (ie the liberals) and the Roman Catholic Church are dealing with who is the head of the church on earth. Lutherans are willing to accept the Pope as a bishop among bishops, but not necessarily the head of the council of bishops. On the Roman Catholic side, I would say it is their hesitation to accept women clergy--though in some areas that seems to be melting away.
Oh, and celibacy. But that is more of an internal matter within the Roman Catholic Community--at least from the Lutheran perspective.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It was the way you'd worded it, Martin.
Ambiguity eh? Well we both missed the other. And I mean, WOULD I?!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
About the only two issues that continue to divide the members of the Lutheran World Federation (ie the liberals) and the Roman Catholic Church are dealing with who is the head of the church on earth. Lutherans are willing to accept the Pope as a bishop among bishops, but not necessarily the head of the council of bishops. On the Roman Catholic side, I would say it is their hesitation to accept women clergy--though in some areas that seems to be melting away.
Oh, and celibacy. But that is more of an internal matter within the Roman Catholic Community--at least from the Lutheran perspective.
I would think that the understanding of the nature of the priesthood would still be a pretty big sticking point. And I'd guess that some might say that transubstantiation vs sacramental union might be as well.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
The Lutherans and Roman Catholics have been in long dialog about the nature of the priesthood and the Lord's Supper. We are in essential agreement when it comes to the real presence of Christ in the communion. The how is minor. It is more important that it is properly administered. We are also in agreement with the priesthood of all believers. We approach the issue of holy orders differently.
However, it is the Lund Declaration that sets the tone going forward, most notably: "Our common
faith in Jesus Christ and our baptism demand of us a daily conversion, by
which we cast off the historical disagreements and conflicts that impede the
ministry of reconciliation. While the past cannot be changed, what is
remembered and how it is remembered can be transformed."
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
English Civil War 1642-51, Thirty Years War 1618-48.
More accurately, the English Civil Wars in that period.
[ 03. September 2017, 22:23: Message edited by: Gee D ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
The Lutherans and Roman Catholics have been in long dialog about the nature of the priesthood and the Lord's Supper. We are in essential agreement when it comes to the real presence of Christ in the communion. The how is minor. It is more important that it is properly administered. We are also in agreement with the priesthood of all believers. We approach the issue of holy orders differently.
However, it is the Lund Declaration that sets the tone going forward, most notably: "Our common
faith in Jesus Christ and our baptism demand of us a daily conversion, by
which we cast off the historical disagreements and conflicts that impede the
ministry of reconciliation. While the past cannot be changed, what is
remembered and how it is remembered can be transformed."
I have ceased to be astonished by how little my Anglican friends know of the Lutheran-RC dialogue. It has developed common understandings of so many of the Reformation hot points that it should have been the major engine of ecumenical relations in the past ten years.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I think it is mistaken to equate the Reformers' notion of Sola Scriptura with later fundamentalist views of the infallibility or inerrancy of Scripture.
The Radical Reformation had a bit of that though, which can be indirectly linked to current fundamentalist inerrancy thought.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
We are also in agreement with the priesthood of all believers. We approach the issue of holy orders differently.
Right, and it is the latter—the issue of holy orders, not the priesthood of all believers—that I mean when I speak of rather large difference between the Catholic understanding of the nature of the priesthood and a Lutheran understanding.
[ 04. September 2017, 03:32: Message edited by: Nick Tamen ]
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
