Luther never threw out anything related to Salvation. The number of the sacraments is not an issue for Lutherans, as evidenced in our Confessions. We emphasize Baptism and Eucharist as well as Absolution but can accept ordination/ holy orders, unction/ anointing, Confirmation within the context of Baptism, Marriage.
In other words he should have shut up and stopped rocking the boat.Perhaps he could have trusted that God would remedy things e.g. indulgence abuses? Jesus said: “I will build my church” and for Martin Luther God’s church was the Catholic Church, at least until he thought that God could no longer bring positive reform to His church. If a person is going to leave the CC, or challenge its authority when faced with corrupt leaders, to the point of getting removed, due to the bad behavior of church leaders, as opposed to trusting in God’s providence, then there really is no reason for anyone to belong to the CC, or any church for that matter; corrupt leaders and bad behavior are never going away, regardless of the denomination just as Jesus predicted in the NT. However, doctrinal truth, is here to stay, just as Jesus predicted in the NT.
Quickly just as it did. Never implied that he should have shut up… He should of trusted in God’s providence, just as Francis of Assisi did. Instead your hero started a trend that resulted in a ripple effect in terms of new churches cropping up, thereby making it impossible for people to discern truth, within the protestant sphere.
Do you agree or disagree:
So why did it take God 1,500 years to sort this out.And what gave Luther the right to make these changes? Obviously the number of Sacraments is not an issue for Lutherans.When a man creates a new religion anything goes.
Have you read ‘From Conflict to Communion’? vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/lutheran-fed-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_2013_dal-conflitto-alla-comunione_en.html
Disagree.
LOL. Because it’s not like the scriptures contain truth or anything that we can “discern”.
Would you leave if a pope from the chair announced that it is serious error to believe that torturing heretics by burning them alive is NOT against the will of the Holy Spirit?
Sure the bible contains truth and everyone discerns the same truth about the Eucharist - right?
If a pope, ex cathedra, announced that it is serious error to believe that torturing heretics by burning them alive is NOT against the will of the Holy Spirit, then it would mean that the gates of hell prevailed against Jesus’ church i.e. God failed and the devil won and I would assume that the end that Paul talked about, was near, and that God, in the end would be victorious: “Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.”
OK. Let’s reverse it: If a person within the CC e.g. Luther, challenged ekklesial authority when faced with corrupt leaders i.e.challenged the corrupt behavior of church leaders then there would still be a good reason to stay i.e. Luther still had a reason to stay with the CC?, In other words stay and trust in God’s providence as did Francis when faced with utter corruption, with no tampering of doctrinal truth, as was the case in the time of Francis and Luther?
You seem to have forgotten that I asked for references in the Lutheran confessions.
True, in the same sense that American legal history goes back to the Magna Carta.
Very non-distinct of a statement. Affirming something as “history” says little or nothing about the form of connection one has.
Would that that were true, and that our family would be re-joined.
At the time Jesus spoke, there were no denominations. There was His Church. Period.
Just like the people that St. Paul excommunicated, it was prescriptive.
He didn’t have the option to stay or leave, he got kicked out.
Then is your opinion that Exsurge Domini is simply wrong?
Even Catholics don’t discern the same teaching on the Eucharist. But scripture is truth, and with it you can learn truth. Even so, it’s not the only truth simply the highest truth.
If the pope murdered a person there would be no problem. The problem is that a pope, and many popes, were teaching that murdering dissenters was the will of God.
I certainly wouldn’t leave if a Pope announced this. But the likelihood of a Pope announcing this these days is pretty much nil. There is precedent in the OT for the stoning (I think with God’s consent) of those who hold heretical views. And I believe that the Popes who went along with this kind of measure were doing what they thought was right at the time. IMO.