Earlier today Anthony Bradley wrote the following (see here):
While I know many Protestants will not find this popular there is something about this with which I agree. Obviously, since I am not a Roman Catholic there must be something about the Reformation that I affirm. Nevertheless, though I am not a Catholic this does not mean that I am not catholic. I am thankful for the reform that occurred in the church, but I am not sure that I am willing to celebrate considering it resulted in a schism.
As Bradley notes one of the few “quoted” prayers we have from the mouth of Jesus is found in John 17.20-23 which reads:
My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. (NIV)
Unless we Protestant are willing to denounce our Catholic brothers and sisters as heretical, and unless Catholics are willing to denounce us Protestant brothers and sisters as heretical, there is really no self-justification for not trying to come as close together as possible. Yes, we disagree on how the Eucharist functions, but we affirm the Eucharist, we affirm the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. We were all baptized into one Spirit. When I ponder this there is only one way that I can celebrate Reformation Day: God, make us one as your Son, Jesus Christ, prayed.
Update: Fourteen years ago Stan Hauerwas said something similar. See here.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Reformation Day = A Day of Lament? « Near Emmaus -- Topsy.com
October 31, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Yeah, I get it, but at the same time that Bradley (who I have a lot of respect for, by the way) denounces the schismatic side of the Reformation, we can’t let that screen out the necessary side of the Reformation either. There were clearly heretical aspects of the Church of Rome that needed to be reformed and denounced. I don’t think you can blame the resulting schisms and divisions on the Reformation itself. What should a Roman Catholic monk do when he comes to believe that the Church is teaching lots of bad things? After all, Luther’s goal was to reform the church, not separate from it.
The position that says, “Hey, the Reformation is when the Church really got it right” is misguided and naive. But the position that says, “The Reformation is nothing more than schism and should not be celebrated” is equally misguided. Bradley is fighting against a tradition that has come to embrace the Reformed world as the only pure and true theological tradition. In that sense I applaud his critique. But his rhetoric is consistently (even if sometimes helpfully) over the top.
October 31, 2010 at 12:54 pm
@Will: Very true and accurate statements. If Luther had his way I think there would have been no schism. I agree that there needed to be reform. That being said I think our prayer for unity is a good one and in that prayer there is hope of continual renewal.
October 31, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Brian, there are some interesting comments on Bradley’s FB post where he put this up there as well.
October 31, 2010 at 4:20 pm
It seems inconsistent to affirm the Reformation and its necessity while considering it a schism. This has never been the position of Reformed folks so far as I know. But let me ask you this: In praying for unity how would you imagine that this could be accomplished? Forget for a moment that Catholics and Protestants agree on some basics like the Trinity and Christology (which really there is more difference there than you’d think at first) and look at the more prominent matters of dispute like justification or the Marian dogmas. How can there be unity as long as Protestants say “by faith alone” or that Mary was a sinner like everyone else when Catholics deny this? For one to agree with the other would mean that one would have to cease being what it is by dogmatic conviction. While unity is a nice thought I can only see it coming at the expense of one groups or the other’s beliefs.
October 31, 2010 at 4:23 pm
@Nick: Well, a great place to begin would be to avoid parading around on a given day during the year celebrating our differences. I don’t expect unity to equate to uniformity. That would be ignorant. And I do take hope in our shared doctrines like the Trinity, Christology, etc. So when it comes to Marian dogma, or issues of justification, we should be willing to passionately live out our understanding of these doctrines from both sides without making those more important that what we share at the center.
November 1, 2010 at 1:05 pm
On Reformation Day I celebrated the fact that salvation is the free gift of God, that Christ’s infinite sacrifice purchased me for God, that God’s wrath was averted through the cross, that mercy rains down on me continuously through the Gospel, that all of my sins are forgiven, that I am eternally reconciled to God, that the Bible is more authoritative than human tradition, that no mere human being stands between my Father and me, that I can draw near to God by faith alone, that the Risen Christ stands as the Mediator between God and man, that He sufficiently intercedes for His Church, and that godly men risked their lives (and even lost their lives) for the sake of these truths. I didn’t celebrate schism, but I certainly celebrated because there is much to celebrate. I can’t lament the fact that I don’t live in the Dark Ages when the Bible was inaccessible to the common person and many priests couldn’t even read. What the RCC refused to do for generations, Hus and Wyclif and Luther and Calvin did – and that deserves credit.
We shouldn’t thumb our nose at the Roman Catholic Church, but instead hope earnestly that she will join us in the celebration of God’s freely bestowed grace.
November 1, 2010 at 1:08 pm
@Derek: I agree with most of what you said but I am always a bit weary of broad brush strokes against Catholics. I know plenty of Catholics who understand God’s grace and a lot of legalistic Protestants.
November 1, 2010 at 1:22 pm
True, and I agree. I started to say as much, but didn’t want to write a whole book . . . so I deleted that part.
I guess I agree with you, at least in saying we shouldn’t celebrate schism. There’s a step toward unity!
November 1, 2010 at 1:33 pm
I took Derek’s point to be that w/o the “schism” we wouldn’t have the Bible in the vernacular, we probably wouldn’t have had Vatican II in the shape we got it, and we wouldn’t have Roman Catholics understanding grace better than some Protestants
.
November 1, 2010 at 4:01 pm
Maybe, but that doesn’t mean schism is something we should celebrate.
Pingback: The Apostle’s Creed: The Minimum for Christian Fellowship? « Near Emmaus