existential mabel

The C0uncil 0f Trent

214 posts in this topic

In my opinion, the Council of Trent's conclusions are contrary to scripture, as is most of the rituals of the Catholic Church. I'll take the teachings of the Holy Spirit, mostly through Paul, than a bunch of men any day.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Council of Trent in my opinion manufactured their own theology using Jesus as a banner. They deemed anathema , the scriptures , faith, Christ alone and a number of other things pertaining to God and Christ. Insuring those who cleaved to that doctrinal imposition would have to rely solely  on the church. Sola Scriptura rejected by Council of Trent

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, existential mabel said:

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/9-things-you-should-know-about-the-council-of-trent

 

http://heritagebiblechurch.com/PDFs/Facts/Trent.pdf

never heard of it before until just now.

this is what i have recently found. not sure where to post this so feel free to move it mods!

Shalom, existential mabel.

As Glenda said to the wicked witch of the east in the Wizard of Oz, "Rubbish! You have no power here! Begone, before someone drops a house on you!" so we can say to the nonsense of the Council of Trent.

The Council of Trent was a BACKLASH to the Reformation as the Catholic Church, greatly reduced in numbers due to the surge of the Protestant Reformation, attempted to regain the sole control they once had over the masses.

That you've never heard about it is a shame. This is why I believe that every child who graduates from high school should have some teaching in a PROTESTANT Christian college for at least as long as they have some Church History.

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

many thanks Retrobyter. very interesting. i like the Wizard of Oz bit yeah click me heels and be gone ...

now what you say reg the backlash is very interesting. i suppose Catholics believe all this then from this  point of view.

i only got into and then out of church again recently. bit of a free spirit. too much information is wasted on me sigh.

for me its about Jesus i just need to keep things very simple as my stress rates are through the roof at the mo and have been for sometime. and thats just the tip of the iceberg so steady sailing at the mo

Edited by existential mabel
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, existential mabel said:

many thanks Retrobyter. very interesting. i like the Wizard of Oz bit yeah click me heels and be gone ...

now what you say reg the backlash is very interesting. i suppose Catholics believe all this then from this  point of view.

i only got into and then out of church again recently. bit of a free spirit. too much information is wasted on me sigh.

for me its about Jesus i just need to keep things very simple as my stress rates are through the roof at the mo and have been for sometime. and thats just the tip of the iceberg so steady sailing at the mo

The council of Trent was no different than previous councils. It simply put into writing what had already been taught and believed since the time of Jesus. When a heresies arises a council is called to sort things out and find the truth.

Quote

 

her·e·sy

ˈherəsē/

noun

belief or opinion contrary to orthodox religious (especially Christian) doctrine.

synonyms:dissension, dissent, nonconformity, heterodoxy, unorthodoxy, apostasy, blasphemy, freethinking; More

opinion profoundly at odds with what is generally accepted.

"cutting capital gains taxes is heresy"

 

Martin Luthers teachings were considered heretical since they were a new teaching that went contrary to orthodoxy. So the Church called a council to determine where the truth lied and also corrected some abuses that were taking place at the time. It's also a legal document and therefore uses legal language and can seem archaic. A mixture of old English and legalize makes for easy confusion.

Of course Protestants today (and back than) would argue that his teaching were not heretical, but the problem is there is no Church or otherwise teaching what Luther taught. It was a brand new teaching and theology and thus meets the definition of a heresy. So now to combat that problem Protestants had to come up with an explanation why a previous untaught theology is true and not heresy so they declared the Catholic Church corrupt and Luther brought back the true teachings of the true church. Again, its a nice story but unfortunately there is no proof and goes against scripture. Scripture tells us that Jesus founded a church and that he will be with us to the end of the age and he will send us the Holy Spirit to guide us into truth. So how can Jesus be with us and the Holy Spirit guiding us and His church becomes corrupt? Doesn't make sense.

One more thing as I wrap up this post..... Only Catholics and be anametha (excommunicated). Its hard to kick someone out of a church that isn't a member of that church right?

Cheers and blessing 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

The council of Trent was no different than previous councils. It simply put into writing what had already been taught and believed since the time of Jesus. When a heresies arises a council is called to sort things out and find the truth.

Martin Luthers teachings were considered heretical since they were a new teaching that went contrary to orthodoxy. So the Church called a council to determine where the truth lied and also corrected some abuses that were taking place at the time. It's also a legal document and therefore uses legal language and can seem archaic. A mixture of old English and legalize makes for easy confusion.

Of course Protestants today (and back than) would argue that his teaching were not heretical, but the problem is there is no Church or otherwise teaching what Luther taught. It was a brand new teaching and theology and thus meets the definition of a heresy. So now to combat that problem Protestants had to come up with an explanation why a previous untaught theology is true and not heresy so they declared the Catholic Church corrupt and Luther brought back the true teachings of the true church. Again, its a nice story but unfortunately there is no proof and goes against scripture. Scripture tells us that Jesus founded a church and that he will be with us to the end of the age and he will send us the Holy Spirit to guide us into truth. So how can Jesus be with us and the Holy Spirit guiding us and His church becomes corrupt? Doesn't make sense.

One more thing as I wrap up this post..... Only Catholics and be anametha (excommunicated). Its hard to kick someone out of a church that isn't a member of that church right?

Cheers and blessing 

That is a typical Roman oversimplification of the truth. Luther's theology was certainly heretical, but it wasn't a deviation from truth, it was merely a deviation from an apostatized faith that itself had deviated from scriptural truth. Luther's theology that exalted justification by faith alone through grace alone was truth. Now modern Catholicism, in order to suck in the more ignorant of compromised Protestantism back into ecumenicism, may claim they also believe in justification by faith and grace alone. However, a close scrutiny of true Catholic teaching reveals this to be a lie. Catholicism is a religion of sacraments. A religion of works. Period.

Also, Jesus's promise that He would remain with the church and guarantee the church's survival, still holds true. That one Roman section left its former position and apostatised into a meaningless  morass of superstition and tradition and then took upon itself to persecute those who chose not to go in that direction, such as the Waldenses, does not mean Jesus abandoned the many who in other lands outside of Roman juriisdiction, such as the early Celtic church in Britain, the church in Ethiopia, and the millions of faithful Christians who populated lands from India to the far east, chose to cleave to the truth.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 hours ago, brakelite said:

Jesus abandoned the many who in other lands outside of Roman juriisdiction, such as the early Celtic church in Britain, the church in Ethiopia, and the millions of faithful Christians who populated lands from India to the far east, chose to cleave to the truth.

Back it up with facts and proof. You claim my post is an over simplification. Yet yours is nothing but unsubstantiated claims. Where was this true Church that Jesus never abandon.

 

6 hours ago, brakelite said:

then took upon itself to persecute those who chose not to go in that direction, such as the Waldenses,

Lets see who the Waldenses are shall we. 

Theology of Peter Waldo and other Waldensian theologians, nowadays mainly theology of John Calvin and other Reformed theologians

RegionItaly, Germany, Argentina, United States, Uruguay, and elsewhere

Founder Peter Waldo

Originc. 1173
Lyon, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France

Separated from Roman Catholic Church

So they are founded on a man made theology (like Luther) they separated from the Catholic Church (like Luther) and now adhere to modern day Calvin theology (not like Luther).

  1. If your church is going to claim to be the true church shouldn't it be founded by Jesus Christ and not a man in the 12th or 16th centuries? 
  2. Also how can you admit Luther was a heretic AND than say he brought out the true teachings?
  3. Why wouldn't the true teachings go right back to Jesus and why would his teachings become secrete and hidden from the masses?
  4. Why would Jesus let the gates of hell prevail against the church he started and let his church go apostate?

Back to the Waldo's, they also founded themselves based on: "The movement originated in the late twelfth century as the Poor Men of Lyons, a band organized by Peter Waldo, a wealthy merchant who gave away his property around 1173, preaching apostolic povertyas the way to perfection."

started in the 12th century and believed they could reach perfection NOT by Jesus BUT by apostolic poverty. This is your secrete underground true church that Jesus never left?

In the Middle Ages heresy was a capital crime. It was viewed as murdering the soul. So yes heretics were persecuted and killed. Stealing a horse was a capital crime up till 1811 in Scotland. That's just for stealing a horse. Leading someone's soul to hell was far greater a crime than stealing a horse. 

Its easy to throw out claims that these secrete churches exsisted when you are surround by like minded individuals that are not going to challenge those claims. But that just continues the circle of misinformation. If you want to reject the Catholic Church and its teachings that's fine, but you need to own the truth and that's the part that is hard.

I look forward to seeing what your secrete true churches are and learning about them. Who knows, maybe my truth will be revealed to be false and I too will come to see the truth of these secrete underground true churches. 

I also caution you about waving the "the church persecuted...." stick, because the reformers did their fare share of persecutions. The anabaptists (if memory servers me correct) were heavily persecuted by both sides, Catholics and Reformers. So careful with that big stick ;)

 

Cheers

 

Edited by Judas Machabeus
phone was glitching and finished post on my laptop.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

Back it up with facts and proof. You claim my post is an over simplification. Yet yours is nothing but unsubstantiated claims. Where was this true Church that Jesus never abandon.

 

Lets see who the Waldenses are shall we. 

Theology of Peter Waldo and other Waldensian theologians, nowadays mainly theology of John Calvin and other Reformed theologians

RegionItaly, Germany, Argentina, United States, Uruguay, and elsewhere

Founder Peter Waldo

Originc. 1173
Lyon, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France

Separated from Roman Catholic Church

So they are founded on a man made theology (like Luther) they separated from the Catholic Church (like Luther) and now adhere to modern day Calvin theology (not like Luther).

  1. If your church is going to claim to be the true church shouldn't it be founded by Jesus Christ and not a man in the 12th or 16th centuries? 
  2. Also how can you admit Luther was a heretic AND than say he brought out the true teachings?
  3. Why wouldn't the true teachings go right back to Jesus and why would his teachings become secrete and hidden from the masses?
  4. Why would Jesus let the gates of hell prevail against the church he started and let his church go apostate?

Back to the Waldo's, they also founded themselves based on: "The movement originated in the late twelfth century as the Poor Men of Lyons, a band organized by Peter Waldo, a wealthy merchant who gave away his property around 1173, preaching apostolic povertyas the way to perfection."

started in the 12th century and believed they could reach perfection NOT by Jesus BUT by apostolic poverty. This is your secrete underground true church that Jesus never left?

In the Middle Ages heresy was a capital crime. It was viewed as murdering the soul. So yes heretics were persecuted and killed. Stealing a horse was a capital crime up till 1811 in Scotland. That's just for stealing a horse. Leading someone's soul to hell was far greater a crime than stealing a horse. 

Its easy to throw out claims that these secrete churches exsisted when you are surround by like minded individuals that are not going to challenge those claims. But that just continues the circle of misinformation. If you want to reject the Catholic Church and its teachings that's fine, but you need to own the truth and that's the part that is hard.

I look forward to seeing what your secrete true churches are and learning about them. Who knows, maybe my truth will be revealed to be false and I too will come to see the truth of these secrete underground true churches. 

I also caution you about waving the "the church persecuted...." stick, because the reformers did their fare share of persecutions. The anabaptists (if memory servers me correct) were heavily persecuted by both sides, Catholics and Reformers. So careful with that big stick ;)

 

Cheers

 

I suggest you do your own research. There are many many very well attested historians who have written volumes on the history of Christianity outside of the church of Rome. The Celtic church in Britain is just one example. Catholic monks, such as Augustine did not arrive in Britain for hindreds of years after the Christian faith was established there...Patrick himself, a 3rd century evangelist and missionary, was the son of a Christian presbyter. This faith of theirs did not come from Rome. It came from Galatia, through other Celtic communities in southern France and northern Italy. There were also Christian communitiies through the far east right up to the 13th century at which time many were destroyed by Tammerlane. Even the Mongols themselves had Christian princes and princesses among their royal families. None of these had anything whatsoever to do with Rome. The Roman church had influence, yes, but only in those places in which she managed to weild political and as well as ecclesiiastical power....with war mostly being the inevitable result. But like I said, do your own research.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, brakelite said:

I suggest you do your own researc

Okay, typical cop out. The rest of your post is more unsubstantiated claims with nothing backing it up.

Theres no point asking you to back up your new claims.... you'll just tell me to do my own research. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites