A time machine back to the 1500's to talk to Martin Luther...,

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That may be the case today but many lived under the tyranny of England’s, King Henry XIII and other rulers in those day. Even today and in recent years, many lived and are still living under dictators, fascist’s and communist regimes, and that has nothing to do with the Catholic Church… Right?
Henry VIII.

I know, typo, but Hank is a hobby of mine.

GKC
 
Back in the days when I was a nonCatholic I often came across statements from the bible claiming how the Catholic church was wrong. I was never able to fully relate how they would get the church’s heresies from their biblical statements. However I read the story of the Tower of Babel. It seemed people objected to the established order (tradition) and tried to find their own way to God. Everything quickly fell apart and everyone was walking away speaking different languages. That reminded me of the Reformation.
 
Back in the days when I was a nonCatholic I often came across statements from the bible claiming how the Catholic church was wrong. I was never able to fully relate how they would get the church’s heresies from their biblical statements. However I read the story of the Tower of Babel. It seemed people objected to the established order (tradition) and tried to find their own way to God. Everything quickly fell apart and everyone was walking away speaking different languages. That reminded me of the Reformation.
Not satisfied with how it reads since I wrote it. People made statements claiming from scripture that the church is wrong. And it always appeared to me to be either a misinterpretation of the bible or misunderstanding of Catholic teachings.

But the Tower of Babel was a story about people rejecting what was established by God (tradition) and tried to build their own way to God. Very quickly things fell apart, there were disagreements, fighting and people speaking different languages. This reminded me of the Protestant Reformation.
 
I would say a BIG NO lol. Why you ask? You stop Luther and another Luther will take his place. Kind of like if you kill a terrorist, you create 5 more.

I disagree a lot with Luther and his beliefs, but he also is probably the closest to the RCC than any other Protestant denomination. I believe, and I am sure Jon with agree with me, that if Luther could see the Lutheran Church today, he would not be happy at the direction it has gone as a whole. I’m sure St. Peter would raise an eyebrow at the Dark Aged Catholic Church as well. I would love to have been a fly on the wall if St. Peter could have sat down with Rodrigo Borgia aka Pope Alexander. Lutherans are actually the least seperated of the Reform Churches. Church of England brought about Methodist and Reformed Theology (influenced by Calvin). There are so many Baptist sects that I lost count 10 years ago.

Luther still considered himself to be Catholic. He actually told those by him before his death to not name a religion after him. So much for listening lol. I have a really good Lutheran friend whom I cherish. We do not see eye-to-eye on certain issues, but he does believe in the RP of Christ in the Eucharist and respects the RCC. Sometimes he puts a lot of stock in “Luther said” but I am sure he feels the same way when I say “the Church says” as well. lol

So, as I stated above, if you stop Luther you are still left with Calvin, Zwingli, Wycliffe and countless others.
 
Leaving the Catholic church was the second best decision I ever made. I knew that Catholics were good people and that it is a Christian church, one of many. But the Protestant churches had picnics, volleyball tourneys, dynamic preachers and lots of single girls (They wouldn’t give me the time of day either). But as a Protestant I noticed contradictory interpretations, vagueness and some extremely devout Christians who were also confused about their beliefs. Many people knew, often in disagreement, where the Catholic church stood issues but didn’t know where there own church stood.

The Catholic church has the documents from Vatican II and the Catechism. That’s about 1500 pages explaining the church’s beliefs. Many Protestant denominations have no catechism at all or just a short booklet. Some independent churches might have a sheet of paper. Of course everyone claims they rely on the bible but there are thousands of churches with very different interpretations of their beliefs. Look at the church around the corner. Do they believe that Jesus is fully God and fully man or half and half? Did Jesus rise bodily from the dead? What is the view of abortion and premarital sex? Can you lose your salvation? What really is baptism? etc. What does that church believe on those issues? Does it even take a stand or avoid them? Do any of its parishoners know? Does the pastor even know?

So by leaving the Catholic church I learned to appreciate it more and become a better Catholic than I would have been otherwise. Thus returning was the very best decision I ever made.
 
What were the reasons, exactly, for Martin Luther leaving the Church? I don’t know much about it, except that he was upset about the indulgences issue, and he was also upset that some in the hierarchy were living very sinful lives. These were problems, though, that were eventually addressed (or at least the indulgences issue. I think it was the council of Trent that finally defined against the selling of indulgences to raise money).

So the above are things that Martin Luther was right to be upset about. I don’t think he should have left the Church over them, though. But then it seems there were Church teachings that he had a problem with, too. So which one weighed more heavily for Martin Luther? Was it the problems in the Church at that time, or was it that he didn’t agree with Church teachings, or just both?

Also, though God allowed him to leave, I don’t think it was ‘meant to be.’ If it was, there would be something in scripture about it (an eventual reformation). But there isn’t.

🤷
 
I answered no because the protestant reformation is a fixed point in time. Our catholic apologist couldn’t convince Martin Luther to remain catholic without doing irreparable harm to the space-time continuum. And even if he were somehow to convince Luther, time would somehow find a way for the reformation timeline to continue with minimal change.
 
I answered no because the protestant reformation is a fixed point in time. Our catholic apologist couldn’t convince Martin Luther to remain catholic without doing irreparable harm to the space-time continuum. And even if he were somehow to convince Luther, time would somehow find a way for the reformation timeline to continue with minimal change.
But how is it a fixed point in time?
 
As has already been mentioned on this thread, Martin Luther suffered from scrupulosity. It’s a mental condition which can be helped, but it requires a good confessor. St. Alphonsus also suffered from scrupulosity, which plagued him for many years. He even wasn’t able to hear confessions early on in his priesthood, because he couldn’t make decisions in the confessional about whether to absolve someone ot not. But he had a good confessor who worked with him, and eventually it was gotten over. And though scrupulosity is a mental condition, it also can show that a person does want to please God very much, but is terribly fearful, too. Does anyone know Martin Luther sought help for this condition?
 
As has already been mentioned on this thread, Martin Luther suffered from scrupulosity. It’s a mental condition which can be helped, but it requires a good confessor. St. Alphonsus also suffered from scrupulosity, which plagued him for many years. He even wasn’t able to hear confessions early on in his priesthood, because he couldn’t make decisions in the confessional about whether to absolve someone ot not. But he had a good confessor who worked with him, and eventually it was gotten over. And though scrupulosity is a mental condition, it also can show that a person does want to please God very much, but is terribly fearful, too. Does anyone know Martin Luther sought help for this condition?
Dr. Johann von Staupitz was the vicar of the monastery and heard Luther’s confessions that sometimes lasted for HOURS. Dr. Staupitz saw the torment that Luther suffered. He urged Luther to study the Scriptures more, and in fact appointed him to teach the Bible - previously Luther studied mostly theology. Although Luther denounced indulgences, he retained Confession and Absolution as part of the practice of the Lutheran church.
 
Dr. Johann von Staupitz was the vicar of the monastery and heard Luther’s confessions that sometimes lasted for HOURS. Dr. Staupitz saw the torment that Luther suffered. He urged Luther to study the Scriptures more, and in fact appointed him to teach the Bible - previously Luther studied mostly theology. Although Luther denounced indulgences, he retained Confession and Absolution as part of the practice of the Lutheran church.
Thanks - that’s more info than I had before. So the remedy which Dr. Staupitz employed for the scrupulosity was to study teach scriptures? Maybe he tried other methods which didn’t work.

Glad to hear that Martin Luther retained confession and absolution. But are these still practiced in Lutheranism? Though this is getting into a different subject. But at least Martin Luther saw the need for confession and absolution, and wasn’t afraid of it, it would seem. That’s maybe what you’re trying to show.
 
Thanks - that’s more info than I had before. So the remedy which Dr. Staupitz employed for the scrupulosity was to study teach scriptures? Maybe he tried other methods which didn’t work.

Glad to hear that Martin Luther retained confession and absolution. But are these still practiced in Lutheranism? Though this is getting into a different subject. But at least Martin Luther saw the need for confession and absolution, and wasn’t afraid of it, it would seem. That’s maybe what you’re trying to show.
Confession and Absolution is considered a part of the Sacrament of Baptism so Lutherans do not consider it as a completely separate Sacrament - but it is encouraged for individuals and not just part of the corporate Confession and Absolution in our Divine Service. Practice varies between congregations as to the number of members that seek out individual confession. Our church strongly encourages it and it’s part of our catechist classes so we will see more useage in the future. In the WELS (where I grew up) we had to “announce” to our pastor our intention to receive communion ahead of time which was an opportunity for examination and confession/absolution as well. Also an opportunity for him to help you see these offenses in case you hadn’t noticed!
 
What were the reasons, exactly, for Martin Luther leaving the Church? I don’t know much about it, except that he was upset about the indulgences issue, and he was also upset that some in the hierarchy were living very sinful lives. These were problems, though, that were eventually addressed (or at least the indulgences issue. I think it was the council of Trent that finally defined against the selling of indulgences to raise money).

So the above are things that Martin Luther was right to be upset about. I don’t think he should have left the Church over them, though. But then it seems there were Church teachings that he had a problem with, too. So which one weighed more heavily for Martin Luther? Was it the problems in the Church at that time, or was it that he didn’t agree with Church teachings, or just both?

Also, though God allowed him to leave, I don’t think it was ‘meant to be.’ If it was, there would be something in scripture about it (an eventual reformation). But there isn’t.

🤷
I’m not sure Luther left the Church inasmuch that he was excommunicated. But I’ll leave the real answer for Jon or other more knowledgeable person than me.
 
I’m not sure Luther left the Church inasmuch that he was excommunicated. But I’ll leave the real answer for Jon or other more knowledgeable person than me.
I guess it depends on one’s POV. From the Lutheran perspective, he was excommunicated, and therefore forced out. From the Catholic perspective, he excommunicated himself.

Jon
 
I guess it depends on one’s POV. From the Lutheran perspective, he was excommunicated, and therefore forced out. From the Catholic perspective, he excommunicated himself.

Jon
I can actually see where both things are true. He became so angry and defiant with the Bishops (including the Pope) that he was “out of order” even without the changes of doctrine.

When he departed from the Catholic doctrine, he removed himself, but then a formal action was taken where he was excommunicated. Didn’t he burn that one in the fire? By that time I think he was so angry and dissolusioned with the Church the actual paper had no value to him.
 
I guess it depends on one’s POV. From the Lutheran perspective, he was excommunicated, and therefore forced out. From the Catholic perspective, he excommunicated himself.

Jon
Jon,
I believe if you read the communications between Luther and the Catholic Church, you’ll see that it is clear that he (Luther) excommunicated himself.
 
Catechism of the Catholic Church

Salvation

**169 Salvation **comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: “We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation.” Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.
**1741 **Liberation and salvation. By his glorious Cross Christ has won salvation for all men. He redeemed them from the sin that held them in bondage. “For freedom Christ has set us free.” In him we have communion with the “truth that makes us free.” The Holy Spirit has been given to us and, as the Apostle teaches, “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” Already we glory in the “liberty of the children of God.”
**620 **Our salvation flows from God’s initiative of love for us, because “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:10). “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself” (*2 Cor *5:19).
**183 **Faith is necessary for salvation. The Lord himself affirms: “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (*Mk *16:16).
**161 **Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. “Since “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life ‘But he who endures to the end.’”

The above is correct, but does not go far enough. The church teaches that after salvation i must earn merits to go to heaven. I earn merits but doing the work. This is salvation through works.
 
=guanophore;10277212]I can actually see where both things are true. He became so angry and defiant with the Bishops (including the Pope) that he was “out of order” even without the changes of doctrine.
I think one can see both points of view. No one really wanted to hear his warnings about corruption, and that may have resulted in anger and frustration. OTOH, “be angry but sin not.”
When he departed from the Catholic doctrine, he removed himself, but then a formal action was taken where he was excommunicated. Didn’t he burn that one in the fire? By that time I think he was so angry and dissolusioned with the Church the actual paper had no value to him.
Of course, he would say he did not depart from the historic apostolic teachings of the Church, but you here well express both views again. “Dissolusioned” may be precisely the right word.

Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top