Reformation Heresy and Sin

Recently, it was heard from a Catholic that the Protestant “Reformers” were justified in rebelling against the Catholic Church, because there was a lot of sin and corruption back then.

That is merely a too-common notion in our day, one derived from the modern sense of entitlement. Essentially, it says that if you don't like something, you can do whatever you want to satisfy yourself.

In response, however, we must distinguish between genuine reform and what was really schism and heresy.

We Catholics admit there was recognized sin and corruption in the Catholic Church in the 1500’s, such as the selling of indulgences, which is the sin of simony.

This is a liturgical and ecclesiastical abuse which should never have happened, though the Catholic Church itself never supported nor taught her support of simony. So it was never, the “policy,” of the Church itself.
That is a modern, and often deliberate, misunderstanding after the fact.
So it is crucial to recognize that these actions were taken by certain members of the Church, sinning and acting against the dogmas of the Church, which is rightfully condemnable. Further, this is particularly condemnable because it constitutes scandal, which in its proper, spiritual meaning is where other people are caused to sin – in this instance, by the corrupt and sinful actions of selling ecclesiastical privileges (indulgences) - by SOME, but NOT ALL members of the Church.

On the other hand, genuine reform in The Church – in any church - aims to promote holiness and faithfulness, whilst rejecting sin and corruption.

But, and this is important, genuine reform happens within The Church in a manner that does not go against the teaching of the Church.

However, it is not reform when you bail out and go set up your own little fiefdom.

The Church, to her credit, recognized the need for reform before the Reformation. We have many saintly members of the Church in that period, such as St. Philip Neri (called the “second apostle of Rome),” who worked hard to reform the Church by promoting righteousness and calling out corruption and sin.
So, it is both ridiculous and false to portray the entire Church and all its faithful members as wallowing like hogs in this sin.

So the Church was already beginning to police itself, instituting precedures to end the opportunity of engaging in this sin. Thus, no matter how much we love a perceived underdog, its also wrong to imagine that the Protestant, “reformers” were noble and rebellious heroes in all this.

They were in fact, engaged in grave sin, and are still so engaged to this day.
More on that in Part 2.


Part 2
As change took hold and progressed within the Church, the most important corrections took place at the Council of Trent (1542), which corrected many of the abuses at that time, and instituted oversight bodies and punitive measures that prevented and forbade the selling of indulgences.

However, there are IMPROPER responses to sin and corruption in the Church, which include concocting false teachings that go against the dogmas of the Church.

The reason for this is not because the Church wants to hold people in chains. Many complain with that sort of verbiage, mostly because they are rather like spoiled children and don't like, “being told what to do.” Again, that is more modern entitlement thinking creeping in.

Rather, The Church has as its focus the fact that Christ set into motion only ONE Church, what developed into The Catholic Church, with,... “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:5-6).
He did NOT create innumerable, “denominations,” each with its own way of viewing Him or His teachings. That came solely from the Reformation.
In fact, He Himself referred to His one Church, as ONE FOLD, to which all must be restored, in time.
In John 15:5-7 it says,... “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”
Remaining in Christ, in this sense, involves being a member of his one and true mystical body (1 Cor 12:12-31), where we enter through baptism and remain active members insofar as we don’t commit mortal sins (1 John 5:16).

Therefore, it is a grave sin against the one Lord, our God and His son Jesus Christ, to create schism, or to believe in, or promote, heresy concerning His Church.

The catechism defines heresy in section 2089:

“Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

The American Heritage Dictionary defines it this way:

heresy /hĕr′ĭ-sē/

noun

1. An opinion or a doctrine at variance with established religious beliefs, especially dissension from or denial of Roman Catholic dogma by a professed believer or baptized church member.

2. Obstinant adherence to such dissenting opinion or doctrine.

3. A controversial or unorthodox opinion or doctrine, as in politics, philosophy, or science.

4. Adherence to such controversial or unorthodox opinion.

5. An opinion held in opposition to the established or commonly received doctrine, and tending to promote a division or party, as in politics, literature, philosophy, etc.; -- usually, but not necessarily, said in reproach.

6. Religious opinion opposed to the authorized doctrinal standards of any particular church, especially when tending to promote schism or separation; lack of orthodox or sound belief; rejection of, or erroneous belief in regard to, some fundamental religious doctrine or truth; heterodoxy.
   Similar: heterodoxy

7. An offense against Christianity, consisting in a denial of some essential doctrine, which denial is publicly avowed, and obstinately maintained.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition

Martin Luther, the so-called “Father” of the Reformation did try to reconcile his differences with the Church, but he was rebuffed by those abusing their power. So, rather than continuing to hold to the teachings of the Church, he promulgated new teachings, and introduced self-proclaimed dogma that had never been taught before by Christ’s one Church, and which is not in Scripture – and entered into schism and promoted heresy.

The only thing we can say to his credit and those that followed him is, they did not engage in total apostasy.

However, the so-called Protestant “Reformers” DID lead many to apostatize from Christ's true Catholic Church, which Scripture attests is highly condemnable: “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Matthew 18:5-6).

It is never excusable to promote heresy, nor to enter schism to promote one's own program – it’s a sin against Christ Himself.
To lead others to go further into schism and perhaps, ultimately, apostasy and repudiating the Christian faith is a grave sin. Sadly, that sin remains on their hands and continues to this very day.

How? Simple: their heretical rejections and self-interpreted, self-proclaimed revelations set an example that evolved into a culture of petulance. Thanks to the precedent they set, people are led to assume they can simply go their own way, convincing themselves that God is what they decide, or worse, that they don't need God or that God doesn't exist at all.

Summary
Yes, there was a recognized need of reform in the 1500’s.

That reform did take place, principally through the Council of Trent and through holy men like Philip Neri.
But, we ought not to consider the Protestant “Reformation” as reformation, properly speaking. It was actually a de-formation of the Christian Faith that introduced heresies and fracturing schisms. One example of that is the rejection of the authority granted to the apostles and their successors, today seen most prominently in the Protestant practice of sola scriptura.
The term, “Reformation” referring to the Protestant rebellion is hence a biased term that is intentionally idealized and self-flattering towards Protestants. 
“Every frog praises its own pond,” as they say.

But to say that Protestants were justified in rebelling against the Catholic Church, which exists solely as The Church Christ Himself instituted, is to be complicit with heresy and schism, which is sinful.

Yes, we should embrace and promote authentic reforms when needed, and the Church will always be in need of reforms because members of the Church on Earth are mortal beings with concupiscence - so the battle against sin and corruption will always exist.
We can also say the same about all churches, so don't anyone reading this howl too loudly about The Catholic Church, or imagine themselves too high and mighty.

 Yet, reforms have to be applied within the Church which Christ Himself instituted – the Catholic Church – and not outside it, following our own prideful notions of what WE will afford God. Otherwise, we reject the head of the Church Himself, who is Christ. And THAT is bad news for those who do so.