A Quick Summary of Exsurge Domine

[guanophore]

So Luther is mixing or trying to include temporal or state matters into the Church council he wants convoked?

There really was no alternative. Looking back, with our modern perception of the separation of Church and State, we see things differently. But from the time of the Nicean Council, all the Church councils needed the support of the temporal/State rulers in order to occur. If the Bishops did not have the protection of the rulers, they could not travel safely.

In addition, from the time the Church became conflated with the State as the Holy Roman Empire, secular rulers were crowned by the Church, and believed they were divinely appointed to their rule.

So whether the corruption was in the church leaders, or the secular leaders, Luther railed against them all.

So Luther prayed for safety…but seems he did not trust God to protect him if his cause was just?

He had good reason to expect to be imprisoned or executed for his speech and writings. It would be difficult to find anyone on record who had been more inflammatory. Assassins could find great favor from powerful people by putting away nuisances.

 

[guanophore]

Actually, I think this was my point. Luthernism and even reformers of Luther’s time did not have one mind and agreement on issues, yet the Church should have been able to coral in Luther and organize his teachings from his false heresies?



Again, From a Lutheran point of view, why was Luther ex Communicated? Do you think he still would have been excommunicated today?

This question has already been recently asked and answered, though there is very little of the Lutheran point of view.

 

[guanophore]

So Luther I think was very much wrong in his teaching that man did not have the will to overcome sin .....

How else can you understand Rom ch. 7?

 

[steido01]

And yet another Reformation thread, this time about Leo’s Bull, devolves into an opportunity to blame Luther.

 

[rcwitness]

Hi Jon: I understand what you have said. However in Exsurge Domine it refuted 41 of Luther’s teachings or doctrines two being 31)In every good work the just man sins and 32) A good work done very well is a venial sin. Now I am not saying that modern Lutheran’s believe this as I really do not know. What I am getting at is that Luther wrote something about these two things I used as just an example that the CC rejected and refuted as errors, which Luther would not recant as well as the other 39 errors the CC said Luther was teaching. So it seems that Luther must have said and or wrote things that the CC thought to be in error and some a heresy, which only deals with Luther himself and not in anyway modern Lutheran’s, since its my understanding that not al of Luther’s teachings and doctrines were accepted or are accepted by modern Lutheran’s. The Augsburg Confession long after Exsurge Domine, so not sure how that plays in with the 1520 document; Papal Bull.

And yet another Reformation thread, this time about Leo’s Bull, devolves into an opportunity to blame Luther.

This question has already been recently asked and answered, though there is very little of the Lutheran point of view.

I just want Lutherans today to realize for one, they dont all stand together, and two, they dont agree with all the things Luther taught and even was excommunicated for.

 

[guanophore]

And yet another Reformation thread, this time about Leo’s Bull, devolves into an opportunity to blame Luther.

I was just thinking the same thing!

:

I just want Lutherans today to realize for one, they dont all stand together, and two, they dont agree with all the things Luther taught and even was excommunicated for.

I don’t believe there is a single Lutheran here that is not aware of these facts.

 

[JonNC]

I don’t believe there is a single Lutheran here that is not aware of these facts.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Jon

 

[rcwitness]

I don’t believe there is a single Lutheran here that is not aware of these facts.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Jon

I agree completely, I really do.

But the attitude seems to be contradictory, when the actions taken against some of the accusations (and not in just in a dialogue fellowship manner, mind you. But with an arrogant attitude of complete confidence and self righteousness) leveled by Martin Luther against the Church (Universal) are criticized as being motivated out of contempt.

I think that it should be fairly recognized as to what modern Luthernism rejects within these 41 bold and unrelenting teachings by the chief reformer. These divided groups within Luthernism should come together and resolve their own differences before accusing the Church Universal of not handling the reformers as they ought to have.

Isn’t it like a son upset with his mother’s rules which he won’t accept and expecting her to mend their relationship, while his own children are not accepting his own rules and he is not able to manage his relationship with them?

Also, how can we possibly discuss the reformation and its documents which are directly related to Martin Luther and his accusations and teachings without recognizing his heresies and false accusations.

 

[steido01]

Also, how can we possibly discuss the reformation and its documents which are directly related to Martin Luther and his accusations and teachings without recognizing his heresies and false accusations.

If you perceive some of his teachings to be heretical, and if those teachings are relevant to the thread, then by all means - discuss those teachings. But bashing his personal attitudes and “arrogance” has nothing to do with whether a given theological point is heretical.

 

[rcwitness]

If you perceive some of his teachings to be heretical, and if those teachings are relevant to the thread, then by all means - discuss those teachings. But bashing his personal attitudes and “arrogance” has nothing to do with whether a given theological point is heretical.

steido01,

I have NOT stated that Luther’s attitude and arrogance had anything to do with why the Church ex communicated him and rejected SOME of his teachings and accusations. But that it probably had alot to do with the manner in which the pope resonded-NOT the content. In th end, we believe that it was NOT Martin’s Catholic faith which compelled him to teach everything he was teaching, but his own interpretations. He was given orders to stop teaching these things which the Church officially opposed. It was not faith in Jesus which compelled him to respond with refusing and calling the pope an antichrist.

I have tried to ask for any Lutheran here to share with us why you, as a Lutheran, believe Martin Luther was ex communicated. This is important because you accuse the Church for not dealing with him in a manner which would have maybe avoided division. But division continued within the reformer’s communions consistantly ever since Luther and even within the Lutheran faith. For the Catholic, reform was necessary. It is always necessary. We are always being converted to behave in line with our Apostolic Teaching. The reason for Martin’s excommunication was not because he was trying to convict Church leaders of their behavior, It was because he was changing the Apostolic Teachings. This means he was attacking the Eucharist. When someone attacks the Eucharist, they end up dividing, and those who don’t remain with His Eucharist will continue to divide.

There will always be personal faults and shortcomings with individual Catholics and non Catholics. That’s why we don’t split from the Eucharist over personal interpretations.

 

[Per_Crucem]

.There will always be personal faults and shortcomings with individual Catholics and non Catholics. That’s why we don’t split from the Eucharist over personal interpretations.

If that argument were true, then every single communion which (in your view) has the Eucharist would not be divided. However, that’s not the case. viz., the East, Oriental, Assyrian, etc.

 

[rcwitness]

Spina1953 brought these two specific teachings of Martin to attention.

31)In every good work the just man sins and

1. A good work done very well is a venial sin.

Would you as a Lutheran believe these? And if your Church said to someone in your Sunday school class who was teaching them, “please stop teaching these things” but they said, “no” what would you do?

 

[Per_Crucem]

Spina1953 brought these two specific teachings of Martin to attention.

31)In every good work the just man sins and

1. A good work done very well is a venial sin.

Would you as a Lutheran believe these?

I wouldn’t, no. However, Luther’s point is mainly that even good works are not 100% perfect, since they’re being performed by a sinner.

And if your Church said to someone in your Sunday school class who was teaching them, “please stop teaching these things” but they said, “no” what would you do?

Refer them to our Confessions.

 

[rcwitness]

If that argument were true, then every single communion which (in your view) has the Eucharist would not be divided. However, that’s not the case. viz., the East, Oriental, Assyrian, etc.

In these Communions, there is still a valid Eucharist. Is this so with a Lutheran Communion?

I am seriously wondering. I thought I’ve heard different answers.

BTW, I am speaking as a God parent to my Lutheran neice. The only time I took Communion outside of the Catholic Church was at this Baptism. I do not think this was permissible, but I’m not sure of the technical reasons

 

[rcwitness]

I wouldn’t, no. However, Luther’s point is mainly that even good works are not 100% perfect, since they’re being performed by a sinner.

Yet, the man is not sinning IN this work…

Anyway, thanks for the honest answer.

Refer them to our Confessions.

 

[Per_Crucem]

In these Communions, there is still a valid Eucharist. Is this so with a Lutheran Communion?

Could you clarify? We obviously think we have a valid Eucharist. Do you mean in communions that we’re not in fellowship with?

I am seriously wondering. I thought I’ve heard different answers.

BTW, I am speaking as a God parent to my Lutheran neice. The only time I took Communion outside of the Catholic Church was at this Baptism. I do not think this was permissible, but I’m not sure of the technical reasons

I wouldn’t accuse you of being anti-Lutheran, rc. You like Wisconsin beverages, how could you be all wrong?

 

[Per_Crucem]

Yet, the man is not sinning IN this work…

Anyway, thanks for the honest answer.

The work itself, because it is performed by a Christian, is pleasing to God. What imperfection is in the person’s motivations, attitude, behavior, etc. is not imputed to him by God. But yes, that has to be phrased carefully.

 

[rcwitness]

Could you clarify? We obviously think we have a valid Eucharist. Do you mean in communions that we’re not in fellowship with?

I meant does the Catholic Church recognize your Eucharist as a valid Sacrament.

Correct me if i’m wrong, but you used a few examples of churches which have a valid Eucharist (according to Catholic Church) yet merely lack a full communion with the authority of the Bishop of Rome.

I wouldn’t accuse you of being anti-Lutheran, rc. You like Wisconsin beverages, how could you be all wrong?

Stop right there! Don’t get me going! It’s been 6 months without cheese curds and Spotted Cow (or Leinies HW, or Fish Fry, or a Brat…etc)

 

[Per_Crucem]

I meant does the Catholic Church recognize your Eucharist as a valid Sacrament.

Correct me if i’m wrong, but you used a few examples of churches which have a valid Eucharist (according to Catholic Church) yet merely lack a full communion with the authority of the Bishop of Rome.

Oh, okay. No, you don’t acknowledge that we have a valid Eucharist. I know there are some cases where there is an exception to that, but on the whole, no.

 

[Tomster]

Thanks for the additional information Kathleen. It’s also a very good thing for Catholics as well as for Lutherans who claim the title Catholic to review a basic outline regarding Trent’s findings concerning Lutheran doctrine.

(1) Original justice was connatural to Adam, like sight to the eyes.

(2) Original sin (loss of original justice) has, therefore, corrupted intrinsically human nature in such a way that man is longer capable of doing any good at all.

(3) By original sin human reason has degenerated and free will no longer exists.

(4) Therefore, man is no longer responsible for his acts, especially since he is tyrannically dominated by concupiscence, which is intrinsically sinful even in its instinctive movements.

(5) Man, fallen through original sin, is incurable, so deeply that not even God can heal him anymore. Therefore the Redemption is entirely a work extrinsic to us, a work done by Christ, who substitutes Himself for us in order to pay the penalty of our sins to the divine justice (penal substitution). Human justification is done extrinsically - in a negative way, i.e., by covering up sin (not by removing it), and in a positive way, i.e., by attributing ((name removed by moderator)utatio) to us the holiness and the merits of Christ.

(6) There is no habitual grace in us; actual grace is not a power or a quality of the soul, but it is God Himself working in us.

(7) The only good act man can do is the act of fiducial faith or abandonement of self to God, by which He confides in His mercy and trusts that his sins have been pardoned.

(8) Consequently, the sacraments have no longer any rasion d’ etre: Luther keeps baptism, penance (by which the remission of sins is declared but not effected), and the Supper (which is no longer the Mass). The bread and wine in the Eucharist remain as they are, but Christ makes Himself present in them (companation), not through consecration alone, but also by virtue of the faith of the faithful.

(9) The monarchical Church with its hierarchy is a human institution: there is no intermediary between the individual and God. The only source from which man and must draw divine truth is the Bible, interpreted individually under the illumination of God (free thought and inquiry). Tradition has only a human value. The true Church of Christ is the invisible Church (influence of Wycliffe and Huss).

(10) The denial of indulgences, of purgatory, of the invocation of saints, of prayers for the dead.

Lutheranism may be characterized as an individualistic pseudo- supernaturalism.

                                                        :highprayer:

Let’s see, where are we? Oh yes, #5 - penal substitution.

The Holy Spirit is sent and the Church exists, and there is only one Church, so that man may become holy, fit for union with God. The process of sanctifying him includes these stages: his reconciliation with God or his justification; his perseverance or increase in holiness; the crowning of his holiness with the beatific vision. With these three things the rest of theology is concerned.

By justification the sinner is restored to a condition of harmony with God. In the words of Sacred Scripture the just man is holy and holiness is justice. Now every kind of justice is an equality, and in this case it is the equivalence between what a man is and what God wants him to be. God’s enduring wish for man is that he live with God’s life and be God’s son. But since, on account of Adam’s sin, he is born without that life, man must be revived or made just again. Thus St. Paul tells the Colossians: “You, when you were dead by reason of your sins, he brought to life.” (Col. 2:13) Hence the Council of Trent says that justification is “the passing from that state in which a man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and adoption among the children of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior.” (Denzinger 796)

According to Luther God effects this transfer by a sort of juridic process. The sinner was essentially corrupted by original sin and a sinner he always remains. If, however, he is clothed in the merits of Christ and has confidence that Christ will save him, God will regard him as just. Justification, therefore, is the imputation to the sinner of the merits of Christ. The Council of Trent rejects teaching because “justification . . . is the sanctification and renovation of the interior man through the voluntary reception of grace and the gifts.” (Denzinger 799) The sinner’s renovation involves first, a real removal of sin. According to Sacred Scripture our sins are not merely hidden from God; they are washed away, removed, eradicated, etc. Second, the sinner is reborn to God, he is a new creation, he is transferred from death to life, he is given a new supernatural life.

(cont.)