The delicious, slippery slope of catholic reign and genuine curiosity about Calvinism. - Osten
Upon reading Zwingli's 67 articles, I came across a humorous tidbit in number 24. Zwingli writes that it's fine to eat cheese and butter and in doing so you will learn that the Romans have lied. I found this funny because who would ever knowingly refrain from eating butter? This called for research. after a few minutes of searching, I found this website, https://history.howstuffworks.com/historical-events/butter-fueled-protestant-reformation.htm. It discusses how butter saved the protestant reformation. It says that some foods, such as meat and dairy, when consumed, caused one to become lustful of another. Because of this sinful food, it was not allowed to be eaten on lent, or, Friday, or Saturday, or Wednesday. But for some reason, it's ok to eat it on Sunday. It was also ok to eat it if you were rich, or gave a monetary contribution to the church, or paid taxes, or purchased indulgences. so essentially you had to buy the butter and the ability to eat it on a nonfasting day. Well, this won't do in the north like France and Germany because they are mainly dairy farmers. This rule was made by the Romans who mainly ate fish and oil anyways. Butter was of no concern to them. Because of their cultural differences, they began to starve large groups of poor people. This was one major reason for the revolution.
After reading the section on Calvinism I still don't understand their way of thinking. It seems as if they are twisting scripture in order to agree with their view. Where did they originally get their viewpoint? Calvinists are unnecessarily prideful. they believe that they are better and more loved than other humans because ...... they want to be? there is no scriptural evidence (unless it is twisted or misconstrued) to defend Calvinism. They also seem to have skipped over the part where Adam and Eve chose to defy God because of the attractiveness of sin. If there is any evidence that was not mentioned in the text please let me know, I'm genuinely curious.
I commented on Moriah's and Kayla
It says it's written by unknown
After reading the section on Calvinism I still don't understand their way of thinking. It seems as if they are twisting scripture in order to agree with their view. Where did they originally get their viewpoint? Calvinists are unnecessarily prideful. they believe that they are better and more loved than other humans because ...... they want to be? there is no scriptural evidence (unless it is twisted or misconstrued) to defend Calvinism. They also seem to have skipped over the part where Adam and Eve chose to defy God because of the attractiveness of sin. If there is any evidence that was not mentioned in the text please let me know, I'm genuinely curious.
I commented on Moriah's and Kayla
It says it's written by unknown
gh
ReplyDeleteDairy I say, you're certainly not buttering up the Calvinists.
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness, way to go on investigating the butter ban. That's a great find. Talk about unintended consequences. It reminds me of Ludwig von Mises's explanation for the decline of the Roman Empire. He said that Rome in the 100s was doing quite well economically with a high degree of division of labor and inter-regional trade; however, a combination of price ceilings on essential foodstuffs and an expansion of the money supply resulted in the selling of these foodstuffs to become unprofitable at the enforced maximum prices and, hence, a reduction of quantity supplied, leaving people starving and fleeing to the countryside. The large farms stopped farming and just became estates hosting self sufficient laborers, leaving us with the social organization that is characteristic of the Middle Ages. These were the effects that caused the decline, rather than the merely opportunistic tribes that invaded in the 300s and 400s. This is only one of several different explanations, but I find this one particularly attractive. The intertwinement of economic and other social events, like the reformation, is fascinating.