For Protestants: Who are your "saints?"

[puzzleannie]

there is a very popular book out know that our kids in FCA are reading about Christian missionaries who died for the faith, most of those cited are Evangelical. there is also the classic Foxe’s book of martyrs. Certainly the reformers are admired for their work, and the founders of the various denominations such as Calvin, Luther, Wesley etc. I also think of biographies of notable protestants for the witness of their lives that have been popular and even made into movies such as Peter Marshall, Christy, Corrie ten Boom, Albert Schweitzer.

 

[april_hosen]

MrS:

By the way… everyone in Heaven is Catholic!!

Hehe!
You make me smile! I actually highly doubt there will be a religion in Heaven. there’ll be no need. All religion’s have their faults, really. I mean I can just see Jesus walking into every Parish or church and just laughing, “So is THAT what you think I meant?.” hehe. The only “religion” is that of complete worship up in heaven of Christ…but this is for a different thread, eh?

 

[LutheranStudent]

Is that the same Martin Luther who was an Augustinian Monk, took vows, then reneged on them all as he rejected the only Christian Authority in the world up to that time… the Catholic Church.

Simply, yes. That is the same Martin Luther who was encouraged and right-near forced by his superiors to become a Doctor of The Church, whereby he took an oath to teach the Scriptures in their truest light - an oath he took very seriously. It is the same Martin Luther who sprung from one of the western Christian authorities of that time, the Roman Catholic Church, and who decidedly battled the false authority of the papacy.

If so, what is it that you admire about him to the level of “sainthood” in this thread?

In Dr. Luther I admire his God-given bravery mostly. It took guts to oppose the most powerful institution of his day. He put himself on the line to try and reform the church - something many others had been killed trying to do.

 

[april_hosen]

jesusluv:

Doreen, just because we are all “called” to be saints, doesn’t mean we are. If we are the saints whose prayers are going up to heaven, who is delivering them to God?

Sir or Madam,
hi! Prayers go straight to God. Jesus is the bridge, he filled that position because no saint or anyone else could.I hope that makes sense.

 

[Egg4christ]

although we’ve traveled a little away from the fact, i’ll try and answer.
I know of several people in my church or surrounding area i would classify as great christian examples.

Unfortunatley, you won’t find that many people siting one person. Main reason being( i think) that we protestants are a little less connected than the catholics. News doesn’t travel as fast. So, most people can point you to a shining example in their church, but not neccissarily one in the nation, unless he or she has published a couple of books.
(please note, i would like for the content of this post to not become a firing range, with comments like “that’s why The Church is the true church” zinging around. Let’s all try to be civil.)

 

[Doreen]

MrS:

The fullness of the Faith can only be found in the Church (not the sinners in it, mind you) which Jesus Himself founded. Only the Catholic Church can lay claim to that fact - and no apostasy has ever happened to destroy the Church (God did promise that…I believe Him)

Therefore, all who enter heaven are now Catholic, regardless of their affiliation on earth.

The Catholic “declaration of Sainthood” - canonization - is the Church’s acknowledgment of particular individuals who have entered heaven. They are the brothers and sisters we should imitate.

However…

Everyone in hell is also Catholic. Those too, after death, now see the Face of God… now are presented with the fullness of the Truth… and have the reality of One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism. But, for whatever reason they knowingly rejected the Church ( and thus the Lord), and mortally sinned, they will spend eternity without the beatific vision.

Billy Graham will one day be Catholic.

You keep giving me new things to think about MrS. Not sure I’m fully on board with you on this…but I like the way you’re thinking!
D.

 

[Doreen]

MrS:

Is that the same Martin Luther who was an Augustinian Monk, took vows, then reneged on them all as he rejected the only Christian Authority in the world up to that time… the Catholic Church.

Much of what he professed was rejected by his immediate “followers”, and much is still rejected today by the Church as heresy.

If so, what is it that you admire about him to the level of “sainthood” in this thread?

Now, MrS…this surprises me coming from you.

You mean, you don’t agree that there were errors in the church in Luther’s day? I am afraid you might be taking the “infallibility of the church” too far, if you think that there haven’t been some who took the teachings in a wrong direction. You can defend the church’s history, but will you not admit that SOME who called themselves Catholic, and found themselves in positions of leadership may have erred?

I believe the churches are all made up of humans, right? So…there’s a pretty good chance some of those humans misled their people.

You can continue to lay claim to hanging on to the basic tenants of the church, but do you really think there haven’t been some problems along the way?

Again…not for this thread…sorry monitor! I submit my questions very respectfully, because I do trust MrS to give me a good answer.
D.

 

[Kitty_Chan]

wynd:

What I mean is, we until recently had Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa as shining examples of Catholic holiness on Earth that we could look to for inspiration (not that there isn’t anyone now, I’m just giving examples). Do Protestants have any fellow Protestants they look up to like this?

Hmm dont know their names and if I did I couldnt post them on the internet anyway, but shining examples of which we could only pray for a small amount of their Faith and come to mind would be the christian believers in the Sudan and China.

 

[Zooey]

Kitty Chan:

Hmm dont know their names and if I did I couldnt post them on the internet anyway, but shining examples of which we could only pray for a small amount of their Faith and come to mind would be the christian believers in the Sudan and China.

Very true!!!:yup:

 

[asteroid]

LutheranStudent:

Is that the same Martin Luther who was an Augustinian Monk, took vows, then reneged on them all as he rejected the only Christian Authority in the world up to that time… the Catholic Church.

Simply, yes. That is the same Martin Luther who was encouraged and right-near forced by his superiors to become a Doctor of The Church, whereby he took an oath to teach the Scriptures in their truest light - an oath he took very seriously. It is the same Martin Luther who sprung from one of the western Christian authorities of that time, the Roman Catholic Church, and who decidedly battled the false authority of the papacy.

If so, what is it that you admire about him to the level of “sainthood” in this thread?

In Dr. Luther I admire his God-given bravery mostly. It took guts to oppose the most powerful institution of his day. He put himself on the line to try and reform the church - something many others had been killed trying to do.

Ah, that Luther. Brave maybe. It did take guts. And he was right. Reform was needed, it always is - there were major abuses in practice in the Catholic church and indulgences were being sold often more as a money making scam than for any good spiritual reason. If the Church authorities had sat up and taken notice and sorted out the abuses rapidly, perhaps all that followed could have been avoided. The Catholic authorities bear guilt in this matter too.

Much of what he said in the 95 theses of 1517 made good points. Thankfully things are done very differently now. His writing on the error of buying forgivenss vs the truth of repentance is very good. Note that Luther wasn’t saying that Indulgences were bad, only that they were abused - which they were, though we might disagree on some of the exact letter of the abuse. No71: “Let him be anathema and accursed who denies the apostolic character of the indulgences.” (taken from the translation on spurgeon.org)

Luther was right to speak up against abuses of the authority of the Papacy. We need people to speak up against abuses in the Church. But he was wrong when he spoke against the actual authority of the Papacy as that was and is given by, in and through Christ.

But remember that Luther was also the man who rejected books of the Bible - books such as Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation - putting them in a New Testament appendix. Of the Gospels he wrote “St. John is the only sympathetic, the only true Gospel and should undoubtedly be preferred to the others. In like manner the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Paul are superior to the first three Gospels.”

And it wasn’t only 7 books he wanted to ditch from the Old Testament. He famously wanted to toss the book of Esther into the Elbe and wished it did not exist, wrote that “we have no wish either to see or hear Moses”, and wrote that Jonah is “so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible”

He’s also the man who added to the Bible so that it would say we are saved by faith *alone. *When questioned about adding the word alone he responded that if he said it should be there then it should be there because he was the mouthpiece of God.

He took his oath to, as you put it, “teach the Scriptures in their truest light - an oath he took very seriously”. The above shows just how seriously he took his oath. Seriously enough to rip parts out of Scripture and add to it to make it agree with him.

 

[Will_Pick]

allischalmers:

the writers of the NT referred to all living Christians as saints.

by the way everyone in heaven is a Baptist

allischalmers (chug chug)

You must be talking about John the Baptist,LOL

 

[MrS]

Doreen:

Now, MrS…this surprises me coming from you.

You mean, you don’t agree that there were errors in the church in Luther’s day? I am afraid you might be taking the “infallibility of the church” too far, if you think that there haven’t been some who took the teachings in a wrong direction. You can defend the church’s history, but will you not admit that SOME who called themselves Catholic, and found themselves in positions of leadership may have erred?

I believe the churches are all made up of humans, right? So…there’s a pretty good chance some of those humans misled their people.

You can continue to lay claim to hanging on to the basic tenants of the church, but do you really think there haven’t been some problems along the way?

Again…not for this thread…sorry monitor! I submit my questions very respectfully, because I do trust MrS to give me a good answer.
D.

I see that the doctrine of infallibility is again the issue.

The Church is perfect, because she is the bride of Christ Who is perfect.

The Church is made up of humans… who are not perfect and do often err.

Jesus = Truth and only the Catholic Church can contain both the fullness of Truth, and sinful men to whom it is entrusted. (Starting with the Apostles)

Jesus’ promise to send the Holy Spirit to guide His Church (not just any Church which might later profess some belief in Jesus) is still in place today.

No individual Pope, and no magisterium of bishops in union with the Pope can ever or has ever taught Doctrinal Error. The “negative” protectection of the Holy Spirit is the promise of Jesus that that gate of hell will not prevail.

However… on their own… popes and bishops, and priests, and former Catholics (Like M Luther) have taught error, taught sin, taught heresy… but never as something all Christians, in all ages, for all times are obligated to accept and believe.

During Luther’s time there was MUCH need for reform of errors. And some, some, he was actually helpful in accomplishing. However he went off the deep end, trying to invent any doctrine that would replace the magisterium and the teachings that pertained to sin and repentance. Luther was a heretic, all the while the pope was only interested in art, wealth, etc.

Today we are still plagued with some bad and some scandalous leaders… just as Jesus promised.

Today we are still in possession of the fulness of the Truth… untainted by sin and error because they are two separate items…kinda like having a perfect son and a monster son living in the same household…

 

[MrS]

april_hosen:

Sir or Madam,
hi! Prayers go straight to God. Jesus is the bridge, he filled that position because no saint or anyone else could.I hope that makes sense.

Matthew 25:

In the conclusion of the parable of the servants and the talents they either used or abused…

"His Master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful with a few things. I will put you in charge of many things, Come, and share(enter) your masters kingdom (happiness).’ "

Some are banished to darkness, some enter the Kingdom.

Now, the questions are"

If someone who has attained the Kingdom, Heaven, is going to be “put in charge of” something, what is it?

Can that “Saint” help those who are already in Heaven? No, there would be no purpose… their eternity is set.

Can that “Saint” help those who are condemned? No, there would be no purpose… their eternity is set.

Can that “Saint” help those still on earth? YEP. There is a purpose because our eternity is not yet set. We are working out our salvation in fear and trembling.

Saints are those who can help us… they are God’s creatures who give us a wonderful example. And by HIS decree… He has put them in charge of helping us.

 

[Irish_Melkite]

MrS:

Is that the same Martin Luther who was an Augustinian Monk, took vows, then reneged on them all as he rejected the only Christian Authority in the world up to that time… the Catholic Church.

Much of what he professed was rejected by his immediate “followers”, and much is still rejected today by the Church as heresy.

If so, what is it that you admire about him to the level of “sainthood” in this thread?

Mr S,

It seems rather less than Christian to attack a poster’s answer to a clearly stated question by the OP - who did he, as a Protestant, think of as a Saint or saint? There was no requirement that he justify his choice and this isn’t apologetics. You didn’t ask him from curiousity why he believed as he does; instead, you couched what you hoped to pass off as a question in terms that made clear to all reading how disdainful you were of his opinion and how superior your own assessment was to his, in your obviously less than humble opinion.

Whether you consider Martin Luther to be saintly or sainted is irrelevant to the matter. It seems to me that among the purposes of the NCR forum are to educate and be educated, not to deride and be snide.

Many years,

Neil

 

[MrS]

Irish Melkite:

Mr S,

It seems rather less than Christian to attack a poster’s answer to a clearly stated question by the OP - who did he, as a Protestant, think of as a Saint or saint? There was no requirement that he justify his choice and this isn’t apologetics. You didn’t ask him from curiousity why he believed as he does; instead, you couched what you hoped to pass off as a question in terms that made clear to all reading how disdainful you were of his opinion and how superior your own assessment was to his, in your obviously less than humble opinion.

Whether you consider Martin Luther to be saintly or sainted is irrelevant to the matter. It seems to me that among the purposes of the NCR forum are to educate and be educated, not to deride and be snide.

Many years,

Neil

we have something incommon… we both called it like we see it.

or perhaps you would like to condone, or support, or agree with his choices.

 

[Irish_Melkite]

MrS:

we have something incommon… we both called it like we see it.

We have nothing in common - for which I am very grateful. I’ve managed to get this far in life without attaining a level of arrogance that would put me into your class.

or perhaps you would like to condone, or support, or agree with his choices.

I don’t think that was the point of the thread as postulated by the OP and before you decided to try and divert it into a “challenge their choices”. Nowhere do I see the OP asking “and can you struggling apologists hop in here and point out to these people that they are wrong in their opinions” - cause that’s what apologetics is all about - right ? Hit 'em between the eyes with evidence of their stupidity and have them drop to their knees in awe of your perceived wisdom? Uh huh … .

Now I recollect why I stay in the EC forum.

Many years,

Neil

 

[MrS]

Irish Melkite:

I don’t think that was …(maybe you got that right )

“and can you struggling apologists hop in here and point out to these people that they are wrong in their opinions” - cause that’s what apologetics is all about - right ? Hit 'em between the eyes
**
sensitive huh?**

with evidence of their stupidity and have them drop to their knees in awe of your perceived wisdom? Uh huh … .

Now I recollect why I stay in the EC forum.

Many years,

Neil

\

okay…bye :tiphat:

I will continue to object when anyone - Catholic or Luthern - says things like Luther was a Saint.

 

[Kitty_Chan]

We are all sinners, maybe Luther didnt get it all right but at least he tried instead of hiding his lamp. Maybe he could get credit for that??

I wonder how the christians in the Sudan and China I mentioned would answer this question?

I dont think they have the luxury of such vast thoughts. Thats why they are a shining example perhaps one day we will have to remember their example.

Or perhaps maybe some were not catholic and therefore by some obvous standards posted here unworthty of Christ??

 

[LutheranStudent]

One of the problems here is that we may have been functioning with different interpretations of the the word saint. Lutherans don’t quite have the same perception as Catholics do, and while I won’t try to explore those differences right now, I will explain my intention.
(When I posted, I assumed that was the intention of the original post.) I was simply placing forward a person who, by what we know of them while they were here on earth, did much to preserve, promote or teach the word of God. In the case of Martin Luther, the persecutions he suffered and the flack he took for the sake of his reformation movement would bear witness to the faith inside. He was not perfect, nor am I. We are both saints in the Lutheran interpretation. He is now a member of the Church Triumphant and I (and you) of the Church Militant.

simul iustus et peccator,
LutheranStudent

 

[MrS]

LutheranStudent:

He is now a member of the Church Triumphant and I (and you) of the Church Militant.

simul iustus et peccator,
LutheranStudent

That may be so… we cannot state with certainty that he is. However, St Theresa of Avila (I have been told), says just the opposite.

And she actually was declared a Doctor of the Church. So we should not presume the final destination of those not canonized.