The Protestant Church Fathers...

[Cepha]

The Protestant Church Fathers...who were they and what did "they" believe?

[righteousone]

There were no 'Protestant church fathers', unless you are talking about Luther, Calvin, Wycliff and Tyndale. All heretics and ex Catholic priests and monks who disagreed with the one true church of christ.
When one disagrees, one should not become angry and go and start another 'church' as these people tried to do. Including changing God's holy word.
The earliest Protestant church fathers were only as early as the 1500's.

[Cepha]

Well, yes. I was considering the original Reformers. Since they started The Protestant Religion, this would make them their church fathers.

But putting aside their relation to The Church, how many of The Reformers can be considerd their fathers?

Luther, of course. Calvin & Zwingli, definately. Are there any other members within the first generation of Protestantism that can be considered as having contributed significantly to the movement?

[I.M.Apologetics]

I would hate to be one of the Reformers:
Protestantism was not started chiefly as a break-off from the Church but as a "reform"
Indeed it was more like a revolt, and the theological movement soon became a political movement, but Luther himself, for example, considered he had reformed, and not breaked from, the Church.

So, not only their efforts were futile and their possible good intentions hijacked by the devil, but their fame is also very disputed.

Many Protestants dislike the Reformers, seeing them as "too Catholic"
Much of modern, and especially American Protestantism is nothing like what the Reformers hoped for.
Many Catholic apologists often focus too much on the Reformer's faults and not their contributions to the Church (because of them Trent occured, which was needed in the Church).
Many Protestant scholars often focus too much on their "courage" or on their "correct" views, and even if they are not Lutheran or Calvinists, they speak well of the Reformers and do not point the fundamental differences between their current views and those of the Reformers (this seems hypocritical to me).

Pax Christi.

[Cepha]

imapologetics said:

I would hate to be one of the Reformers:
Protestantism was not started chiefly as a break-off from the Church but as a "reform"
Indeed it was more like a revolt, and the theological movement soon became a political movement, but Luther himself, for example, considered he had reformed, and not breaked from, the Church.

So, not only their efforts were futile and their possible good intentions hijacked by the devil, but their fame is also very disputed.

Many Protestants dislike the Reformers, seeing them as "too Catholic"
Much of modern, and especially American Protestantism is nothing like what the Reformers hoped for.
Many Catholic apologists often focus too much on the Reformer's faults and not their contributions to the Church (because of them Trent occured, which was needed in the Church).
Many Protestant scholars often focus too much on their "courage" or on their "correct" views, and even if they are not Lutheran or Calvinists, they speak well of the Reformers and do not point the fundamental differences between their current views and those of the Reformers (this seems hypocritical to me).

Pax Christi.

Well said IMA.

Some of the Reformers were great Christians.

Martin Luther himself fought against any other groups being started outside of The Church. He thoroughly condemened schisms.

Yet, those who believe in what Luther taught against actually base the bulk of their religious beliefs on his teachings.