- Status
J
JustaServant
Guest
In order to understand history, you have to take yourself out of the time you are living in and step into the world Luther lived in. Transposing 21st century thought and attitudes is not really a good way of understanding the 1500s.
Let’s take a few things into consideration:
Luther was a product of his time.
The reasons for his split from the Church have largely disappeared and have been replaced with a common enemy: secularism.
Did Luther cause that? To say he did is a rather simplistic conclusion to a movement that was much bigger than Luther.
There are many things that have led us to the problems we face today, events that found it’s genesis in the 1500s and later.
Luther was a product of his age.
His mistake was allowing these historical forces around him to bring him to the point of separating from the Church. So, why do we have thousands of denominations? Is Luther alone to be blamed? Luther may have been a factor. But he was hardly the **only factor **to take into consideration.
He was caught up in a historical period.
That makes him human, not a devil.
Try to look at the larger picture.
Let’s take a few things into consideration:
- By the 1500s Europe had finally overcome the effects of the Black Plague, which took a toll of millions of Europeans. The 1500s were the result of a “baby boom” that brought a new era in Europe after centuries of plague and war. Immigrants were part of that boom. As many of them settled in Europe after these events took place.
- This “new generation”, like the Boomers of the 1960s, wanted to throw off many of what they considered to be the “Medieval chains” around them. To overlook the radical “movements” that would transform Europe in the centuries after, is not a clear picture.
3.These movements eventually led to, not just the Reformation, but the Enlightenment as well, and many strides in science, technology and exploration. The good came with the bad.
Luther was a product of his time.
The reasons for his split from the Church have largely disappeared and have been replaced with a common enemy: secularism.
Did Luther cause that? To say he did is a rather simplistic conclusion to a movement that was much bigger than Luther.
There are many things that have led us to the problems we face today, events that found it’s genesis in the 1500s and later.
Luther was a product of his age.
His mistake was allowing these historical forces around him to bring him to the point of separating from the Church. So, why do we have thousands of denominations? Is Luther alone to be blamed? Luther may have been a factor. But he was hardly the **only factor **to take into consideration.
He was caught up in a historical period.
That makes him human, not a devil.
Try to look at the larger picture.
R
R_C
Guest
Maybe you should read the history of the Church again, and what the early Christians had to say about the bishop of Rome. Like, for instance, Irenaeus, who in AD 189 wrote:
1 John 1:10
And it is worthy to recall the words of Origen (AD 248) and Cyprian of Carthage (AD 251) on this matter:
A
AbideWithMe
Guest
Well said, IMO.
A
AbideWithMe
Guest
I have to say I’m impressed with the fair-mindedness of several of the Catholic posters on this thread.Maybe a well-educated Lutheran can help put some of these into context. I know that even Sacred Scripture can be ripped out of context and put into a really bad light, and I am willing to argue that there is a fair bit of that going on in this article. The more ellipses and hyphens I see, the more willing I am to think something it taken out of context.
Now, I don’t doubt that Luther was schismatic and taught a good many things that the Church didn’t (and doesn’t) approve of, but I would honestly love to hear the context for a lot of these. However, I’m not grounded in any of Luther’s works - is anyone else? Living in a very divided Catholic/Protestant home, I’m always looking for ways to bridge the gap.
God bless. x
E
EvangelCatholic
Guest
In 2010 the worldwide Lutheran Communion * formally apologized for the persecution of Anabaptists [Baptists] and Mennonites in the 16th & 17th century. In 1994 Lutherans profoundly sought forgiveness from Jews. Here’s part of that declaration:
R
robwar
Guest
Hitler didn’t use St. Ambrose and St. Chrysostom. Hitler based his 6 step plan to eliminate the Jews on Luther. Hitler likewise did quote Johann Eck who was Luther’s Catholic nemisis at the time and likewise very anti- semitic. The Catholic church has repeated condemned anti-semetism and does not promote it. The Catholic Church tried to save Jews during WWII. There is a Catholic Bishop Galen who repeated was out spoken against Hilter from the start. Except for a few isolated Lutherans, where was the outcry against Hitler? Luther was an angry man and his writings on a number of issues show it. While he is still revered as standing up to the big old bad Catholic Church, looking at what he actually wrote and taught and not sweep it under the rug is what should be done here. I once asked a Lutheran’s minister’s wife about the rather violent writings of Luther and if it bothered her. She told me that “well he was blunt and earthy, he was still an admired guy”
R
robwar
Guest
since both St Ambrose and Chrysostom were mentioned, one does have to realize that both were in the 300-400 where there was still a lot of conflict between Jews and Christians. St. Chrysostom spoke out against Christians that went to celebrate Jewish holidays. the style of speach at the time was to be forceful against your opponent. St. Ambrose spoke out against Christians being forced to rebuild a destroyed Jewish synogoge but he did have in his writings where he admired devote Jews in their practice. These two are a far cry from someone promoting death to all Jews like Luther did.
H
hn160
Guest
This thread is getting out go hand, I never seen so much rancor against Luther and Lutherans in general. It seems that some Roman Catholics wouldn’t know the truth if they fell over it. Blaming Luther for Hitler is like Obama blaming George Bush for Obama’s problem.I was very interested to read the OP and the thread, and I have bookmarked the OP’s website and recommended it to others. I’m pleased that Mr. Gray has joined our discussions with this information.
So there.
A quick scan of the yellow pages in my area has revealed the following:
Grace Lutheran Church
Resurrection Lutheran Church
St. Philip Lutheran Church
Good Shepherd Lutheran Church
Well, you get the idea. So, you have simply “owned” the “prejorative [sic] label”? Why? We don’t call ourselves papists or Romish just because these epithets (and worse) have been hurled at us.
Augustinians, Dominicans and Franciscans take those monikers out of respect for the founders of the orders they join even though they would say that they ultimately follow Christ. So, I think it is pretty fair to say that Lutherans have embraced the spirit of Luther in much the same manner. The problem now, however, is that evidence like that posted in the OP (and by Dave Armstrong and others) is pretty damning. But instead of disavowing the pathetic Luther, you have doubled down. Well, you own the whole truckload now.
Knowing what we know today about the man, I would be embarrassed to be associated with him. But you wear his name with pride. I think that is very telling, frankly.
Yeah, this is like Planned Parenthood advocates trying to disavow the eugenics of Margaret Sanger. Sorry, but I’m not buying the argument. So, while I grant that individual Lutherans are not anti-semites or think the pope is the anti-Christ, etc., and that Lutheranism as a collective body may have also disavowed these things to varying degrees, the fact remains that Lutheranism was off track from the moment of its inception, and he set you on a path or trajectory that is off the rails to this day.
Jesus founded one Church upon one rock, and Luther was not it. Period.
Don’t forget it was the Catholic Church that started the Inquisition and burned Hertics at the stake.
E
EvangelCatholic
Guest
An example of Lutheran shame: sfgate.com/news/article/S-F-Lutherans-Apologize-to-Jews-St-Mark-s-3036969.php
stmarks-sf.org/
stmarks-sf.org/
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
It seems that at least one Lutheran wouldn’t know the truth if he fell over it.
Articles on the Inquisition
The Inquisition
catholic.com/tracts/the-inquisition
**An Inquisition Primer **
By Robert P. Lockwood
catholic.com/magazine/articles/an-inquisition-primer
**Secrets of the Spanish Inquisition Revealed **
By Robert P. Lockwood
catholic.com/magazine/articles/secrets-of-the-spanish-inquisition-revealed
A New Look At the Spanish Inquisition
by Edward O’Brien
ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/SPANINQ.TXT
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
I’m just curious…if the Inquisition is EVIDENCE that the Catholic Church is disqualified from being the True Church of Christ, then do the witch trials that occurred in Salem, Massachusetts, Essex, England and many of the PROTESTANT countries of Europe AFTER the Reformation PROVE by logical extension that Protestantism is not of God?
If the Crusades demonstrate that the Catholic Church is evil, then what do the persecutions of the Catholic Church in England and Switzerland (among other places) tell us about the “reformed” churches? That they are not so “reformed” after all? Just more of the same under new management?
And if the unauthorized sale of indulgences provides fodder for those who seek to throw off the shackles of the “Romish” church once and for all, then what do the pathetic broadcasts of modern day televangelists tell us about the state of Protestantism? “Brothers and sisters, send in your donations to support this ministry. Now, lay your hands on your TV and be HEEEEEEEEALED!”
If the Crusades demonstrate that the Catholic Church is evil, then what do the persecutions of the Catholic Church in England and Switzerland (among other places) tell us about the “reformed” churches? That they are not so “reformed” after all? Just more of the same under new management?
And if the unauthorized sale of indulgences provides fodder for those who seek to throw off the shackles of the “Romish” church once and for all, then what do the pathetic broadcasts of modern day televangelists tell us about the state of Protestantism? “Brothers and sisters, send in your donations to support this ministry. Now, lay your hands on your TV and be HEEEEEEEEALED!”
D
doormouse73
Guest
nice reply
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
:tiphat:
A
Alizarin
Guest
What are you saying? That both faith communities are equally screwed up?
If so, maybe that infers something crucial about the nature of institutionalized religion
S
steido01
Guest
Ah, I see what you are saying. Perhaps it would be more accurate to call us the “Evangelical Catholic Church of the Augsburg Confession,” as opposed to “Lutheran.” You know, our church body considers changing its name nearly every time we hold our national conference; “Missouri” Synod implies to some that we are a tiny, geographically-limited portion of something larger, and not a national body with a presence in every state. But every year, the church body votes against changing it. Missouri is a part of our history. So is Luther - warts and all. We can revere the saints that went before us while condemning their more unsavory actions - if we didn’t, we Christians would have few saints to revere, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”I really do hear all of what you’re saying. I’m just not convinced. There isn’t a Resurrection Evangelical Catholic Church in town, but there is a Resurrection Lutheran…
So, let me try another angle. I’m not a huge NFL fan, but I lived in the DC area for many years, so my favorite team is the Washington Redskins. Now, I personally have no problem with the name of the team because I’m a college-educated, middle-aged, middle-class, white male. My only imperfection seems to be that I’m no longer a Protestant.
But in some quarters, the name “Redskins” is viewed as being politically incorrect, and so there is increasing pressure on the team and the owner to change the name. (One way to increase the pressure would be for the news media to simply refuse to use the name Redskins and to refer to the team as “Washington” exclusively in print and on the air until Snyder changes its. But I digress.) The name has a negative connotation, so it should be changed - or so the popular opinion goes.
I’m not one to give in to popular opinion (ask my family!), but these kinds of things are important to some people. Eventually, the name of the team will be changed.
Of course, this is not a perfect analogy for your situation. However, it seems to me that in modern times, unflattering information about Martin Luther has come to light. Consequently, I see no advantage in continuing to label yourselves as “Lutheran” when the name clearly has negative connotations.
Unless, of course, you are proud to be associated with him.
On another level, it’s about practicality. Imagine the confusion that would ensue if a “Lutheran” church no longer called itself “Lutheran” (not to mention the outcry there’d be from Roman Catholics about “protestants using ‘our’ Catholic name!”).
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
You know - I stayed away from this forum for a few years, and thought I would come back. And then I read this thread and am reminded why I left.
Almighty Father, forgive us. We don’t know what we’re doing.
Almighty Father, forgive us. We don’t know what we’re doing.
E
EvangelCatholic
Guest
Yes, many catholics but fewer Christians.
D
doormouse73
Guest
it puts things into perspective though. glass houses come to mind… not to quo que at all.i never seen it like that.just let him with out sin cast the first stone…
take it back to the magisterium all will be well,we are all sinners that is why he gave us the Church in Rome…
i dont go for the RC against the Protestant thing… i just go for the teachings of the RC Church,like i say we are all sinners but Jesus left us one Church NOT 50,000 all making there own rules and regulations up…
take it back to the magisterium all will be well,we are all sinners that is why he gave us the Church in Rome…
i dont go for the RC against the Protestant thing… i just go for the teachings of the RC Church,like i say we are all sinners but Jesus left us one Church NOT 50,000 all making there own rules and regulations up…
D
doormouse73
Guest
- Status