![]() ![]() Es sollte über alle 23 Artikel des Wormser Buchs verhandelt werden. Außerdem wirkte der päpstliche Legat Gasparo Contarini als Berater der Altgläubigen mit. ![]() Vertreter der altgläubigen (katholischen) Seite waren Johannes Eck, Johannes Gropper und Julius von Pflug. Die protestantischen Vertreter waren Martin Bucer, Johannes Calvin, Philipp Melanchthon und Johannes Pistorius. Er berief einen Ausschuss von damals namhaften Theologen ein, der unter der Leitung seines Ministers Nicolas de Granvelle und des Pfalzgrafen Friedrich II. erschien zu diesem Anlass erstmals seit 1532 wieder im Reich. Im Wormser Religionsgespräch, das von Dezember 1540 bis Januar 1541 stattgefunden hatte und aus dem das so genannte als Diskussionsgrundlage entstanden war, war die Fortsetzung des Religionsgesprächs beschlossen worden. einberufen, der angesichts der drohenden Türkengefahr nicht auf die militärische Unterstützung der protestantischen Fürsten verzichten konnte. Das Regensburger Religionsgespräch von 1541 fand im Zug des statt und sollte ein friedliches Mittel zur Einigung von Altgläubigen (Katholiken) und Protestanten sein.El Coloquio de Ratisbona, también llamado Coloquio de Regensburgo, o Dieta de Ratisbona/Regensburg o Interim de Ratisbona/Regensburg fue una conferencia llevada a cabo en la ciudad de Ratisbona en 1541, durante la Reforma protestante, en la cual culminaron los intentos de restauración de la antigua unidad del Sacro Imperio Romano a través del debate teológico.The Colloquy of Regensburg, historically called the Colloquy of Ratisbon, was a conference held at Regensburg (Ratisbon) in Bavaria in 1541, during the Protestant Reformation, which marks the culmination of attempts to restore religious unity in the Holy Roman Empire by means of theological debate between the Protestants and the Catholics.On the 31st the revised version of the Regensburg Book was delivered to the Emperor, together with nine new articles that the Protestants had composed in opposition to some of the articles in the Book that had not been agreed. On 22 May the colloquy came to a close, the article on justification being its only significant achievement. ![]() Ultimately, as always, the colloquy foundered over the question of authority. While the doctrine of justification had not been defined by the church, transubstantiation had been proclaimed by the Fourth Lateran Council. He rejected Granvelle's suggestion that discussion of the word be deferred to the end of the colloquy. He insisted on its insertion and would not countenance any compromise. Ironically, it was the same Contarini who was willing to be flexible over justification who torpedoed the colloquy by his intransigence over the word transubstantiation. The colloquy soon began to founder, but that was because of differences on other doctrines, such as the infallibility of councils and transubstantiation, not because of shortcomings in the statement on justification. The joy and the hope engendered were to be short-lived. Most of the participants of the colloquies on each side were Erasmian humanists, sharing a concern to reform the church by going behind the middle ages to the sources of the golden age of the church, the Bible and the Early Fathers. The division between Protestant and Roman Catholic was more substantial - though not so substantial before the Council of Trent (1545-63) as after it. Protestantism eventually resolved into Lutheran versus Reformed but it was not inconceivable that the more moderate elements might have united behind a Protestant confession. With hindsight that can appear an inevitable outcome, but it did not appear to be inevitable at the beginning and even today we cannot say with certainty that is was an inevitable outcome. In the latter part of the sixteenth century Europe divided into rival confessions: Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed. Was it not clear that there could be no common ground? The answer is that it might be clear to us, with the benefit of hindsight, but it was not at all clear at the time. The modern reader may wonder that was the point of these debates. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |