ArminianOnceWas
Puritan Board Freshman
Sorry, but I must ask. What possible difference could / would this make for today's church? Are we going to track down the descendants of those people and alternatly punish or make reparation to them? Do we somehow become more virtuous by digging up and pointing out the sins of our forebears? I just don't get its relevance.
My observations have been that most in the Reformed camp love to keep their history books very near their Bibles. We feel a conviction to point out theological and social errors of the past, Pelagianism and Catholicism just two examples. However, my feeling here is that the impression for many is that history all of a sudden loses its relevancy when applied to our own closer darker past.
Do we discuss historical theology and church history merely because of our interest or because of the lessons learned from the past? If we do because of more than just academic interest, then why wouldn't the sins of our forebearers be a relevant discussion?
Does it make us too uncomfortable? Is it much easier to look at the sins of Catholicism and Anglicanism? Does it make us more virtuous to try to forget the mistakes of Presbyterian history?