My friend, you directly compared Reformation day to Christ's alleged schism from "the established Judaic religion of his day". Last I checked Reformation day is on the anniversary of Luther's posting of his 95 theses, no? It wasn't my comparison, it was yours. The Reformation is in no way comparable to Christ's ministry.
Quote:
What I did do was respond to your point that, in essence, was that schism within the Church is per se wrong, without qualification.
I don't know about
wrong, but it is
bad. Just like a divorce is per se bad. Whether or not such a thing is justified or whether one party is more or less in the wrong than another is a different question than the quality of the thing itself. Schism in the body of Christ is a tragedy. The only reason people celebrate Reformation day is because they think Luther was right (or Zwingli, or Calvin, or whomever). Schism and heresy is a work of the flesh.
Quote:
I was rebutting that point by demonstrating that Christ himself was, at times and under certain circumstances, schismatic. I did not compare any person or any movement to Christ.
This is nonsensical. Christ cannot be schismatic, He is the criterion. You could say that others separated from Him, or from the Truth, but that action is solely on their side, not His. Schism is sin. And this is precisely why you are comparing the movement - by linking the two you have absolutely compared Luther's separation from the RCC to Christ's alleged schism from certain Judaic groups. Your argument boils down to - it's ok to have a schism if you're right, because Christ was schismatic and He was right. The unsaid portion is that Luther (or the other Reformers) were right, so it's ok that they were schismatic.
Quote:
And was the schism the responsibility of the Reformers, or that of the RCC church? The RCC church could have responded to the light being shined on its error and sin the same way that Peter and James responded to Paul's challenge to them.
The answer to who has responsibility is "yes". But the greater wrong was on the Reformers, from where I stand. It isn't as if we had a split in the RCC resulting in two factions or heresies, but we had a split resulting in a shattering of communion into uncountable splinters. Once the door was opened the Reformers went separate ways within years. How can you talk about Truth? "Has Christ been divided?" "He is not the God of disorder."
Quote:
Your cheap shot was ignoring the point I was making and continue to make - that the schism was not caused by the Reformers and, further, that pursuit of God's truth and holiness is never bad even if it results in schism.
Ha! Which schism? Who pursued God's truth - Zwingli, Calvin, Luther? It cannot be all, they're mutually exclusive in their claims, they all broke from each other.
"There must be heresies among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized."
"Stumbling blocks are necessary to come, but woe to the man by whom the offense comes!"