Could the Reformation have been prevented?
- Thread starter Romanos
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2017
- Messages
- 7,760
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Anglican
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
I'd say. Yes," to the question, but the bigger question asks what it would have taken in order to head off the Reformation.
1. Would simply having a more open reaction to Luther, similar to what Francis of Assisi got despite at first being seen as some sort of oddball, have made a difference?
2. Or would more extensive changes have been necessary?
3. If the Lutheran Reformation had been prevented in one way or another, would this have squelched the idea of religious reform elsewhere in Europe? and
4. What were the least easily resolved areas of disagreement between the Vatican and the Reformers?
I'm sure that other members can add additional issues that might need to be considered.
1. Would simply having a more open reaction to Luther, similar to what Francis of Assisi got despite at first being seen as some sort of oddball, have made a difference?
2. Or would more extensive changes have been necessary?
3. If the Lutheran Reformation had been prevented in one way or another, would this have squelched the idea of religious reform elsewhere in Europe? and
4. What were the least easily resolved areas of disagreement between the Vatican and the Reformers?
I'm sure that other members can add additional issues that might need to be considered.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Yes. At least the Lutheran one (and probably the English one)...
Luther was appointed a Doctor of the Church by his bishop; his assignment was to spot wrong teaching and report it. He did. What was being preached by the indulgence sellers was heresy and a clear contradiction of the Council of Orange and official Catholic teaching. The Bishop - and other leaders of the RCC - simply chose to sweep this aside for the sake of 1) Getting money to build St. Peter's in Rome and 2) politically support the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire against growing influence in Germany. IF the leadership of the RCC had simply acknowledged the heresy and took steps to correct those indulgence sellers, the Reformation likely would have been evaded.
As often happens, as things began to unfold, it all took on a life of its own. The issue (Pelagianism etc.) was increasingly displaced by the defense/promotion of the Roman Catholic institution, both in terms of money (it needed a LOT more and Germans were thought to not be paying their fair share) and more, in terms of the POWER of the denomination (and there was NOTHING the RCC cherished more than POWER).
The ESTABLISHMENT needed to avoid reformation and change... protect the earthly institution... and enlarge it's treasury and power, and influence in secular affairs. Luther was a threat who needed to be stopped (with a sword if necessary). Luther was even suggesting that the singular, unique RCC denomination wasn't infallible but rather accountable!!!!! On the CAtholic end, it was all about the denomination and promoting its power and money... And a lot of people (including kings and princes) saw Luther as a way to diminish the political power money and drain and thus embraced Lutheranism. It became pretty political. Could this too have been avoided? Absolutely... if the RCC had cared more about truth than itself.
.
Last edited:
SetFree
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2022
- Messages
- 347
- Location
- USA
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Non-Denominational
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
I don't think it could have been prevented.
The Reformation was by God's Hand. I have no doubt that the movement to put His Word in print for wide distribution to the people was also by His Hand. And that He chose king James, Defender of the Faith, to oversee the widest distribution of His Word with the 1611 King James English Bible, which has been translated to so many languages.
The actual number of language translations from the 1611 KJV is still in debate, but something like 706 different languages is the standard.
In the original 1st edition 1611 KJV Bible, the translators wrote 2 letters that appear prior to the Scripture text. One letter is to the Reader, and the other letter is to King James himself. Within those letters the translators express their separateness from the authority of a "bishop of bishops", i.e., a Catholic pope.
The Church of England has had its spells with influence by the Roman Church, however, it has inevitably remained separate from the Roman system. Even though it took a German Catholic like Martin Luther to plant the 'spark' that led to the Reformation, it had to happen per God's ordaining which the evidence is proven by the expansion of the Protestant Church and individual understanding in having the ability to study God's Word for themselves, even to have a copy in each believer's home.
When I was in Spain in the 1970's, my Spanish friend and I visited a lady in Madrid, and upon her bookshelf I saw a Bible. I asked her if she ever read it. She replied, "Oh no, that's for the Parish priest to tell us what it says." I'm not sure now, but at that time, if you were born in Spain, you were born Catholic by law. Italy was the same way, both answering to the Roman Catholic Church. If I decided to marry a Spanish citizen in Spain, I myself (raised as a Protestant) would have to convert to the Catholic system, by law. Public Protestant Churches were not allowed in Spain at that time. I don't know about now. Protestants in Spain had to meet in their homes.
The Reformation was by God's Hand. I have no doubt that the movement to put His Word in print for wide distribution to the people was also by His Hand. And that He chose king James, Defender of the Faith, to oversee the widest distribution of His Word with the 1611 King James English Bible, which has been translated to so many languages.
The actual number of language translations from the 1611 KJV is still in debate, but something like 706 different languages is the standard.
In the original 1st edition 1611 KJV Bible, the translators wrote 2 letters that appear prior to the Scripture text. One letter is to the Reader, and the other letter is to King James himself. Within those letters the translators express their separateness from the authority of a "bishop of bishops", i.e., a Catholic pope.
The Church of England has had its spells with influence by the Roman Church, however, it has inevitably remained separate from the Roman system. Even though it took a German Catholic like Martin Luther to plant the 'spark' that led to the Reformation, it had to happen per God's ordaining which the evidence is proven by the expansion of the Protestant Church and individual understanding in having the ability to study God's Word for themselves, even to have a copy in each believer's home.
When I was in Spain in the 1970's, my Spanish friend and I visited a lady in Madrid, and upon her bookshelf I saw a Bible. I asked her if she ever read it. She replied, "Oh no, that's for the Parish priest to tell us what it says." I'm not sure now, but at that time, if you were born in Spain, you were born Catholic by law. Italy was the same way, both answering to the Roman Catholic Church. If I decided to marry a Spanish citizen in Spain, I myself (raised as a Protestant) would have to convert to the Catholic system, by law. Public Protestant Churches were not allowed in Spain at that time. I don't know about now. Protestants in Spain had to meet in their homes.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2017
- Messages
- 7,760
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Anglican
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Why do you think God chose the 15th-17th centuries to make this correction, considering that the church had been off course for about a half dozen centuries prior?
SetFree
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2022
- Messages
- 347
- Location
- USA
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Non-Denominational
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Well, the dissimination of His Word on such a large scale would not have happened without the printing press.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2017
- Messages
- 7,760
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Anglican
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Yes, but nothing prevented God from having the printing press be invented before the 15th century.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
IMO, the invention of the printing press AIDED the Reformation since it allowed ideas to be propagated (the RCC could not just burn a few books and end the information). But on the other hand, there are much crazier ideas around now - 500 years with the printing press - than then. The printing press - like the internet - serves falsehood as well as truth.
.