Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Reformation or Revolution?

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
976 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Jul 24, 2007

This is derived from a blog entry I wrote entitled, "Reformation or Revolution?"

  • likes, 1 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (paleocrat)

  • But the Catholic church by order of Pope Leo X first burned the works of Martin Luther and sought to burn Luther at the stake, I ask have you read the book of Concord and if you have not then why not? But before the Lutheran church I ask what of the Greek christians that were outside the catholic church. You forget that Luther always said that all those who preach against the word of God are to be judged and punished by God. Why not read the 95 theses and then claim that Luther intend reformatio

  • @mrlittlemarvel I am not sure what your point is aout Leo X and Luther. I own the Book of Concord. I've also read the 95 Theses. For the record, I was a staunch Calvinist for about 10 years prior to my conversion to Catholicism. My opposition to Protestantism is laid out rather clearly in other videos. Bottom line: Luther's actions, and arguably his intent, was that of revolution, of reformation. Pure and simple.

  • Plus, the Catholic Church itself has had its own schisms. Go ask Mel Gibson for more information.

  • Yes, we have schismatics. But we do not recognize their ordinations, sacraments, or status as a church.

    Gibson's father is sedevacantist, but he is not.

  • So, summed up, Luther's reformations basically led to the implosion of the Christian religion in the late Middle Ages. With the Renaissance behind the mentally accelerated, this led to the Enlightenment and eventually to the development of modern freethought. Interesting.

  • This is fallacious. Just because events took place as they did does not by necessity mean that they couldn't or wouldn't have happened otherwise.

    One would also have to think that the so-called Enlightenment was a good thing and that the freethought that followed was also good. I see neither as being ethical advancements in either philosophy or sociology.

Video Responses

This video is a response to Final(?) Thoughts on Sedevacantism
see all

All Comments (16)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @paleocrat Look I am sure you have read all these things and made sure that you asked teachers in the Lutheran church to explain them and make clear Lutheran teaching. Now Lutheran's believe salvation can be found in the RCC and outside it but not outside of Christ. You can arguably say that the Peter being the rock reference made by Christ can be interpret as to say Peter's confession of faith that was shown a little early so all authority goes to Christ and not one man,

  • I love this mans logic! he is on the ball!

  • Instead of accepting the reforms, the Roman Church dug in their heels and surrounded their system with anathemas so people were afraid to leave.

  • The Devil told Eve to "think for herself". Protestant preachers told the unwary that the Church kept them in the dark. Then the "enlightened" told man that all religion was designed to quell free thought. The old boy's trick still works.

  • Right on! The One True Church rocks!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more