This coming Sunday, Reformation Day, many Baptists will join millions of other Protestant believers around the world in celebrating an event that took place on Oct. 31, 1517. On that day, an obscure Augustinian monk named Martin Luther posted (whether by nail or by mail is a matter of dispute) his “95 Theses” on the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany.
Luther used Erasmus’s newly-published Greek New Testament to come to a new understanding of repentance and the Christian life. The Latin Vulgate had rendered the Greek word metanoiete as “do penance.” Luther now saw that this New Testament word did not refer to external penitential acts such as prayers, fasting, pilgrimages and indulgences. It referred instead to a genuine change of heart and mind, a turnaround brought about by God’s sovereign grace in the hearts of men and women who abandoned hope in themselves to trust in what Jesus Christ had done for their salvation. Luther rediscovered what Augustine believed and what Paul taught: Human beings are put to rights by God sola gratia, “by grace alone.”
This didn’t “cause” the Reformation. A call for reform in the church had been brewing in late medieval Europe for several centuries. Think of St. Francis and his radical critique of the extravagant wealth and posturing of church officials. Remember the Waldensians huddling together to study the Bible in the remote valleys of the Alps. Recall the Bible translations by John Wycliffe and the Lollards in England, the fiery sermons of Savonarola in Florence, the martyrdom of John Hus at Constance.
as much as I love the resources (Reformation reader book, History of Christianity DVD) this article by Timothy George is patently SECTARIAN, and not completely true (historically, etc.) and purely singing to the choir (Baptist Evangelicals).
Examples:
“The authority and sufficiency of Holy Scripture is a cornerstone of both the Reformation and Baptist heritage.”
Historically the Holy Scripture has not been “sufficient” for establishing all true doctrine. YES, all true doctrines derive and exist in the Holy Scpritures, but the Bible and its various interpreters have given BIRTH to 10,000 different Protestant denominations, many of which have very strangely different theologies, dogmas, confessions, and distinctives from each other …
yet….
all of them claim Sola Scriptura … We have the Truth … we teach the Faith … but few of them can say … our doctrines are in continuity with the Faith of Christ and the Apostles, of the Early Church.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE of exageration and manipulation:
“The Reformation of the 16th century was a Scripture-based renewal movement within the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. The Baptist movement emerged as a renewal within the renewal.”
YES, a Scripture-based renewal movement, but FALSE, not a renewal movement withing the “one holy catholic/universal and apostolic church.” There was nothing apostolic about the Anabaptist movement, and many of the reformation movements had nothing to do or wanted to do with forming or working towards a ONE church as the Apostles and Nicean Creed states (“one holy catholic/universal and apostolic church.” )
A 3rd example from Timothy George:
“We do well to recall Menno Simons’ favorite verse in the New Testament: “For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (I Cor. 3:11).”
Seems like Menno Simons cherry-picks Bible verses, because he did not seem to also read or at least apply … the truth found in … 1 Tim 3:15 … “the Church being the pillar and ground of Truth.”
By: Gabriel Borlean on 5 November 2010
at 10:16 pm
… The late Jaroslav Pelikan once spoke about the “tragic necessity” of the Reformation. Both aspects are relevant today.
says the last paragraph …
As I Christian who happens to worship in a liturgical and confessional Lutheran church in Denmark, … I find it interesting that Timothy George quotes Jaroslav Pelikan, a famous Slovak-American church historian on the Reformation … when Jaroslav quietly converted to the Eastern Orthodox church in the last decade of his life.
The BEST explanation (most objective) I have ever read about the times, work, and influence of Dr. Martin Luther, has been nevertheless by a Roman Catholic historian/theologian … Hans Kung / Kueng … in “Great Christians Thinkers” chapter on Luther.
By: Gabriel Borlean on 5 November 2010
at 10:20 pm
“Reformation remains what it was for Luther: to proclaim the overcoming grace of God, the gospel of salvation by faith alone in Jesus Christ alone based on the clear teaching of Holy Scripture alone.”
NOT quite SO accurate Dr. George:
not the overcoming grace of God … but the “unresistable” grace of God
not “based on the clear teaching of Holy Scripture” (otherwise we would not have Post/Pre Millenialists, Once Saved Always Saved vs. Losing ones Salvation, Double Predestination vs. Lutheran confessions vs. Armenianism … etc., etc.) …. but based on the teaching of Holy Scripture and in line with the teachings (aka interpretations or traditions) of the Apostles as practiced and confessed by the Early Church
This is something the Lutheran confessions (Book of Concord … http://www.bookofconcord.org/) is very keen on making sure they do not deviate from … Word of God … and the Church of God.
By: Gabriel Borlean on 5 November 2010
at 10:25 pm
Mi se pare o critica exagerata, care ar da impresia ca doar protestantii ar avea diversitate in randurile lor…Ati uitat de catolici: ce divergente de doctrine intre augustinieni, augustiniani (Luther era augustinian) si iezuiti, sau in sanul ortodocsilor intre cei de rit vechi si rit nou, sau intre ortodocsi si monofiziti (Copti, sirieni) si armeni, si, daca veni vorba de lutherani (nu prea inteleg daca sunteti pentru sau impotriva lor in cele scrise mai sus) vezi diferenta dintre Luther si Melanchton apropo de predestinare, sau intre lutheranii evanghelici si cei liberali, etc, etc, etc….
By: Vali on 7 November 2010
at 5:53 pm
Mie nu mi se pare o critica exagerata, Vali, caci acestia, chiar daca foarte diversi, se considera parte a aceleiasi Biserici, in vreme ce noi suntem gata sa ne afurisim pe cele mai minutioase puncte de doctrina, asa cum se vede de la o posta si pe acest blog.
By: DanutM on 8 November 2010
at 9:58 pm
scuze: la catolici era vorba de dominicani, augustinieni, franciscani si iezuiti – unii din ei sunt pro-liber arbitru, altii sunt pentru predestinatie…
By: Vali on 7 November 2010
at 5:55 pm
Si bineinteles, ce diferente intre ortodocsi si catolici – in primul rand – unii cred in filioque, altii nu, unii cred in primatul papal, altii nu, unii ordineaza doar preoti celibatari, altii si casatoriti, etc, etc…Cum se face ca aceeasi traditie apostolica, sustinuta cu atatea sfintenie mii de veacuri, a nascut o asemenea diversitate?
By: Vali on 7 November 2010
at 6:03 pm
Stii bine cum se face, ca doar ai studiat istoria Bisericii. Si totusi, pina la Chalcedon, acestia au fost intr-o singura institutie, si la fel chalcedonienii pina la Schisma.
ma tem ca noi am pierdut viziunea Bisericii ‘unam, sfinta, catolica/soborniceasca si apostolica’ si aceasta, trebuie sa recunosti, este o tragedie cu consecinte catastrofale pentru marturia crestina in lume.
By: DanutM on 8 November 2010
at 10:00 pm
Danut,
Ai observat CUM a raspuns … la comentariile mele .. Pastorul Paul Dan … la comentarul meu critic asupra articolului si asupra informatiilor incomplete care Paul Dan (probabil Crestin Dupa Evangelie, sau Dupa Noul Testament) le lasa initial ?!?
Vali,
Mi se pare logica ta cam aiurita … Compari … diferite forme sau marimi de BANANE (ortodoxii) sau diferitele soiuri de MERE (catolicii) … cu gruparea sau mai bine zis DIVERSIFICAREA si AIURIMIE differentelor mari dogmatice care exista intre … PROTESTANTII, mai ales NEO-PROTESTANTI + “Schwarmer” (cum ui numea Dr. Luther) …
adica grupa … of all the BERRIES … (strawberries, cranberries, raspberries, gooseberries, and so on).
Get my (or your) logical fallacies, now, Vali ?!?
By: Gabriel Borlean on 23 November 2010
at 7:58 pm
Nu, n-am vazut. Paul Dan este un subiect care nu ma intereseaza. Cred ca omului asta ii lipseste o doaga, si nu merita sa-ti pierzi vremea cu el.
By: DanutM on 23 November 2010
at 8:18 pm
Gabriel, daca logica mea ti s-a parut cam incoerenta, este pentru ca interventia mea a fost un raspuns la postarea ta la fel de incoerenta…Ai scris despre aiurimea diferentelor dogmatice la neoprotestanti – care este intr-adevar, mare, cum bine zici, si de care nu sunt nici eu incantat – , dar in mod ironic, cei pe care ni-i oferi ca modele – ortodocsi, catolici sau protestanti, au avut in sanul bisericilor lor multe (daca nu cumva aproape toate) din diferentele la care faci trimitere: de exemplu disputele premilenism-amilenism dateaza din primele secole (multi mari parinti ai bisericii erau premilenisti – Iustin Martirul, unul dintre acesti premilenisti, scrie insa ca existau in vremea sa si alti crestini maturi, dar care nu credeau in Mileniu), in privinta ideii de duble predestinare vs lutheran confesions, dupa cum te-ai exprimat, aceasta exista chiar in sanul lutheranismului: Luther se spune ca a fost mai calvinist decat Calvin, insa Melanchthon, dupa ce acesta a murit a renuntat la dubla predestinare; in plus, asupra problemei predestinare-liber arbitru au fost dispute si in evul mediu, si in primele secole – vezi disputa intre Augustin si Pelagius, plus semi-pelagianismul care i-a urmat; inevitabil legate de aceste doctrine sunt si disputele daca mantuirea se pierde sau nu, ca sa nu mai adaug ca si in ce priveste botezul (infant sau matur) au fost dispute in acest sens inca primele veacuri pe vremea lui Tertulian, sau a capadocienilor: Grigore de Nazianz, de exemplu, s-a botezat matur – ideea era ca daca pacatuiesti dupa botez iti pierzi mantuirea; de aceea multi in acea vreme, pentru siguranta, se botezau inaintea mortii…Ca sa nu mai vorbesc de diferentele intre monofiziti si ortodocsi, care ii fac pe catolici si ortodocsi, culmea ironiei, sa fie mai apropiati de neoprotestanti decat de coptii din Egipt…(apoi disputa iconoclasta, reluata in perioada reformei – in special de calvini)…E trist – si aici sunt de acord cu Danut – faptul ca protestantii (si mai ales neoprotestantii) nu au stiut sa pastreze unitatea in diversitate, asa cum au stiut sa o faca catolicii in interiorul bisericii lor, dar nu si apropo de relatia lor cu ortodocsii. Si e si mai trist ca multi neoprotestanti nu cunosc si nu sunt interesati de cunoasterea scrierilor parintilor bisericii…Insa daca este sa criticam pe neoprotestanti, cu Timothy George, care mi-a fost decan la Beeson Divinity School, ti-ai gresit adresa…Omul asta iubeste traditia si citeste la greu scrierile Sfintilor Parinti, este un entuziast al ecumenismului – e unul din liderii dialogului dintre evanghelici si catolici in America, iar unul din colaboratorii sai la Beeson Divinity, profesorul Gerald Bray, este preot anglican, specialist in teologia rasariteana si traducatorul unei serii extraordinare de comentarii ale Sfintilor Parinti la cartile Bibliei…
By: Vali on 23 November 2010
at 10:50 pm