Were there any good Christians before the Lutheran Reformation?

Many many many many many of them. Some were in the Catholic organisation, witnessing from within as to the truth of the gospel.

More, probably millions, were outside of the Catholic Church and multitudes were martyred at the hands of the Catholic tribunals for their gospel witness.

Mike

 

Excellent post Matt. I wanted to definetly second this part of your post and just say I completely agree even if Peter were the Bishop of Rome this still does not mean that he would be the earthly 'Head of the Church' he would simply be the Patriarch of the Western Church. His power would be honorary just as those of the other Orthodox Patriarch's.
In Christ,
Nate </font>[/QUOTE]So Nate can you tell me something.

1) Who is in these days the Legitimate Successor of Peter? Will you tell me as a British, it is your Queen?</font>[/QUOTE]To my mind that's the wrong question. The question for me is: who is/are the legitimate successor(s) of the Apostles?

My answer to that would be: the Catholics, the Orthodox, the Anglicans and the Lutherans and Methodists in so far as they have maintained some kind of Apostolic Succession. Arguably, those last three ahve as much a claim to be the legitimate successors of the medieval Catholic Church as does the post-Trent Catholic Church - all (including the Tridentine Catholic Church) are different from the medieval Catholic Church yet all can be said to have sprung from her.

The 'authorities' were the Apostles. Note the plural nature of the term: it is not one Apostle eg: Peter (and his successors), but all of them (and their successors).

See above re Methodists and Lutherans; the Baptists doubtless can speak for themselves but they in turn came out of Anlgican Separatism.

Yes to the first part of your last sentence, no to the second - why do you limit authority to one Bishop, the successor of only one of the Apostles? Jesus didn't appoint one Apostle, He appointed the Twelve...

 

Faith in the South, what, if anything, do you have to say about Biel and his ilk?

 

As to apostolic succession, we Lutherans would respond. Who cares? The validity of the faith is not based upon the men ordained to serve as God's shepherds but upon the promises of Him who is the foundation of our faith.

 

Depends what sort of Lutheran you speak to, I guess ; your Scandinavian brethren seem particularly keen on AS and, IIRC, that was part of the driving force behind the PORVOO AGREEMENT

 

I think but I not positive at least one of the churches listed in the agreement has since pulled out of the agreement, the Lativian Lutheran Church. They have since that time undergone a revitalization of doctrinal purity. AS generally is not a subject that Lutherans are willing to live or die over, however we are wary of the abuses that have come out of such polities.

Having studied the ecumenical movement I have noticed that the CoE won't even come to the talks unless the other church is willing to submit to their AS, hence the E?CA giving up the right to ordain their own ministers.

 

1. There were many Christian believers inside Roman Catholic in Western Europe before the Reformation. One of them may be Thomas A Kempis.

2. There were many Christian believers outside Roman Catholic in Western Europe before the Reformation.
They were dissidents group against or disagreeing with Roman Catholic

3. There were many Christian believers in Orthodox ( Greek or Russian) in Eastern Europe before the Reformation

4. There were many Christian believers in Asia and in Ethiopia before the Reformation, such as in Iraq, Persia, Samarcand area, Mongolia, China, Korea, Japan.
In India they were preached by Apostle Thomas, who may have preached to China as well.
The Oldest Christian monuments in China dates back to 86 AD.http://www.edessa.com/history/monument.htm

The recent discovery in North Korea tells that there was a Christian community around 200 AD.
Tang Dynasty of China had the Christianity which was the second largest religious group, next to Taoism then. King Tae-Jong himself is believed to be a Christian.

There were 3 times of movement there: 1 century, 6-7 centrury by Nestorian, Eastern church during Mongolian 12-13 c.


5. In Western Europe there were many believers who were persecuted by Roman Catholic, who were called, Cathari, Albigenes, Waldenses, Montanists, Donatists, West German Brethren, etc. They influenced unto Bogomils,Bohemian Brethren, Moravian Brethren etc. after Reformation.

Staupitz was the one who influenced Martin Luther greatly, and was Waldenses.
They didn't belong to Roman Catholic as they refused Mary Worship, Idol making, Papacy etc.

You can find some of the excerpts here:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/thailand/PC-B-016.HTM


http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/thailand/PC-B-015.HTM

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/thailand/PC-B-013.HTM

Above is from Pilgrim Church by EH Broadbent.

I don't agree with the Author entirely as he recognize Catholic Church and Origen quite a lot, but I would agree that EH Broadbent wrote quite reliable Church History.

But one thing clear is that God is faithful and victorious all the time and He preserved His church faithful to the Truth all the time.

 

Staupitz as Waldenses? Hardly, the man was vicar-general of the Augustinian order such a man would not be Waldenses

 

1. I agree that not all the denominations were correct in their doctrines.

2. Not all the churches outside Roman Catholic prayed to Mary or called Mary as Mother of God, which is very much Heretic!

3. Not all the churches outside Roman Catholic worshipped Idols of Mary!, which is Heretic!

4. Nestorians refused calling Mary as Mother of God but they believed in Deity of Christ, Trinity.

 

Eliyahu, a couple of points:

1. Mr Broadbent, good Brethren chap that he was, did not go so far as the likes of Carroll or Wylie as proposing some kind of Succesionism; however he did err in assuming that all the groups you mentioned were Christian; it has I think been demonstrated on this board that that is not the case.

2. Faith in the South makes a good point concerning your beloved Nestorians - they and the other Oriental groups engage in practices with which you disapprove and call 'Idolatry, idol-worship, Mary-worship' etc

 

Broadbent wrote the book based on fact by fact available, but there can be a lot of things which cannot be supported by facts and he didn't mention such in general. His focus was whether any group was based on the salvation or being born-again, and therefore if there were found any good clues for the Gospel, he included them as Christians even though there were some wrong practices.

There are not so many evidences for Eastern churches for practices, but it is said that they brought the statues and I don't know what kind of statues they brought. It is not certain whether they worshipped Mary or not. It seems that they went to be like philosophy.