"On the Benefit of Christ's Death"
There was a Reformation/Counter-Reformation era treatise that circulated in Italy in the circa-1540's entitled: "The Benefit of Christ's Death;" it was favoured and backed by several cardinals, but lauded and encouraged by some in the reformist camp: it leaned toward's salvation by "faith alone." Just how precisely the treastise defined "faith alone" or whether this conceptualisation was agreeable to Catholic belief, being properly understood, as some Catholic [the Spirituali] saw it in in permissible light; whereas it may have been pro-reformists or pro-Protestant.

My Question is thus: Is the work: "The Benefit of Christ's Death" perpetuated and circulated by the Spirituali faction of the church during the Reformation-era, orthodox OR is it heretical?

I am not certain; I haven't a clue. 

Your thoughts, opinions, or informations  appertaining to this work or the "Spirituali" in general is most appreciated.
-Sincerely yours,

The spirituali, members of a reform movement[1]  within the Catholic Church, operated from about 1510 to the 1560s.

The ranks of the spirituali included `Cardinal Gasparo Contarini (1483-1542), Cardinal Jacopo Sadoleto (1477-1547), Cardinal Reginald Pole (1500-1558), and the artist Michelangelo (1475-1564). These "Italian evangelicals" proposed to reform the Catholic Church through a spiritual renewal and internalisation of faith by each individual. They saw the intense study of scripture and justification by faith as means to that end. The Spirituali took many of their ideas from older Catholic texts but certainly found inspiration in the Protestant Reformation, especially Calvinism. The Benedictine monk Benedetto Fontanini wrote the first version of the most notable expression of Spirituali doctrine, the Beneficio di Cristo, in 1543; later the poet and humanist Marcantonio Flaminio revised it.

However, although Spirituali occupied positions of high power within the church hierarchy, they failed to achieve much change and more "fundamentalist" zelanti currents, such as the Jesuits, set the church on a course of confrontation with the Protestants at the Council of Trent (1545-1563). It has been speculated[by whom?] that the Spirituali's lack of success stemmed from their hope for Church reform without a challenge to Catholic authority; that is to say, for a peaceful renewal from within. This made them suspect to both Protestants and conservative Catholics and made the movement ineffective. Pope Paul IV (1555-1559) acted to suppress the Spirituali and many went on trial before the Inquisition.

The moral is that the spirituali movement was an attempt, which did not survived.
Your "question is thus"? Dude, speak english. It works.

My opinion is that the treatise was a pile of crap, or a surfeit of excrement, upon the Church suchwith.

That's what the Church said too.
I can attempt to speak proper or I can speak ghetto-tard gutter english where "i be wit' my homies; 'n my french-toast slice, yo!"

I prefer the former rather than the latter option; thank you very much.

The question in case you couldn't understand it in a more crass way: Is the treatise orthodox or a crock of shit? Is that plainer?
(06-04-2010, 09:29 AM)Benno Wrote: Your "question is thus"? Dude, speak english. It works.

Jesus Christ did not spoke English. Is He worthless?

Jesus Christ always argued, and that is what works.

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)