The amount of pride it takes to think all Christians were wrong for 16 centuries, and some men 1500 years removed from Christ finally got the message of the gospel right is actually insane
"Imagine going to church and never hearing the gospel. That’s why the Reformation’s a big deal."
-Stephen Nichols
#ToChristAlone
#TheQuoteShelf
https://blossom.primal.net/664f6d9b2b744ed1dd36842a9610f2dcce1201dcc5ccba09768f634371fed2cc.webp
Discussion
Do you not credit the Reformation with distributing the Word of God directly to households, decentralizing the faith?
That has nothing to do with whether or not the reformers preach a valid gospel
But to answer your question, I would give that credit to the printing press.
Also, I don’t view “decentralizing the faith” as a good thing. Christ had one body, his Church is his body. There’s one true Church. While I would credit Rome with starting the endless schism/fracturing of Christ’s Church, I don’t think pushing the division even further is anything protestants should be proud of
I should clarify. I do think the printing press making the scriptures more accessible to the average person was a good thing. But the reformation “decentralizing the faith” was not a good thing. The Roman church became the OG protestant church when they fell into heresy and schism in 1054, then the reformation democratized the papacy. The reformation made everyone a pope. Their own infallible interpreter of scripture.
Depends on the amount of reform intended and accomplished. Roman Catholics think Lutherans are all part of the reformed church, aka “Protestant”, and they ARE… but Lutherans are far closer to Catholics than they are to all other Reformed church bodies.
And Catholics are hardly a monolith, even if they want to claim The Pope as a somehow uniting force.
I don’t think that is the contention. But clearly the RC church drifted from the faith when they were selling indulgences and torturing people during the Inquisition? Or is that all in line with Christ?
Correct, the Roman church had fallen to heresy and schism centuries before the reformation.
I see. We agree on that. So which flavor of Orthodox are you? And why should I have confidence that your flavor is the right one? I looked into Orthodoxy and found some things about it compelling, but when I found out that there were multiple schisms in the Orthodox Church and that they try to brush this under the rug, it all started to go sideways.
Please enlighten me on the different “flavors” of Orthodoxy
Surely you are aware, are you not?
Here are the branches of Eastern Christianity:
Eastern Orthodox Church
Oriental Orthodox Church
Assyrian Church of the East
Eastern Catholic Church
And all of these have subdivisions too.
The Eastern Orthodox Church is the Eastern Orthodox Church. Really simple. Yes, the Oriental Orthodox Church is schismatic. The other 2 don’t even claim to be Orthodox, Orthodox doesn’t mean eastern
So why do you believe Eastern is correct and Oriental is wrong? And what if you pick the wrong one? Does Christ’s blood still redeem you or only if you are part of the One True Church?
The Oriental Church split off after the council of Chalcedon (mid 5th century).
The council confirmed that Christ has two natures- divine and human but the Oriental Church disagreed (monophysites) and has not been in communion with the Orthodox Church since.
Yes, I read up on this schism and it seemed like splitting hairs over something that is not worth breaking fellowship.
Ultimately, whenever I engage in this sort of discussion I end up with Paul’s words ringing in my ears:
“Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.” - 1 Cor. 1:10-17