How would you respond re: Reformation?

[austenbosten]

Austenbosten…you are a Lutheran looking to Catholicism…Why?

Hahaha! I knew my big mouth would generate that kind of response. I’m simply looking for something a little more fulfilling. Martin Luther never wanted to break away from the Church and as a result I received a taste of High-church Lutheranism when I was living in NY(basically the closest you can get to Catholicism and still be Lutheran) and well HC-Lutheranism is not something you find often…also many HCL churches happen to be ELCA and since they have shifted so far away from the Bible and Luther’s teachings that the only choice would be the RCC.

 

[aicirt]

Hahaha! I knew my big mouth would generate that kind of response. I’m simply looking for something a little more fulfilling. Martin Luther never wanted to break away from the Church and as a result I received a taste of High-church Lutheranism when I was living in NY(basically the closest you can get to Catholicism and still be Lutheran) and well HC-Lutheranism is not something you find often…also many HCL churches happen to be ELCA and since they have shifted so far away from the Bible and Luther’s teachings that the only choice would be the RCC.

LOL…well you have it under your name. Couldn’t help but notice.

ELCA has shifed away from the Bible and Luther’s teachings: What about the Missouri Synod? I don’t know the difference between the two. I’ve only been told that the MS is closest to RC.

Looked up Luther on Wikipedia to get a thumb-nail version of him. And I found out that he put in "alone"after the word “faith” in Romans 3:28, supported monks and nuns negating their vows, rejected Purgatory, and believed the antichrist to be the Papacy and the Roman Catholic Church. For someone not wanting to break away, he sure gave evidence to the contrary. Know what I mean?

 

[austenbosten]

LOL…well you have it under your name. Couldn’t help but notice.

ELCA has shifed away from the Bible and Luther’s teachings: What about the Missouri Synod? I don’t know the difference between the two. I’ve only been told that the MS is closest to RC.

Looked up Luther on Wikipedia to get a thumb-nail version of him. And I found out that he put in "alone"after the word “faith” in Romans 3:28, supported monks and nuns negating their vows, rejected Purgatory, and believed the antichrist to be the Papacy and the Roman Catholic Church. For someone not wanting to break away, he sure gave evidence to the contrary. Know what I mean?

Yes I’ve tried LC-MS and it is more faithful to the Bible, and loyal to Luther’s teachings but LCMS high-churches are rare. As for closest to RC, it depends. The NY church I attended to was a high-church in which the worship practices and doctrines are similar to RC…as Lutherans would joke “Catholic-Lite”.

As per your “thumbnail” you missed Luther: The first anti-Semite. There is a lot of criticism of Luther. As should be, he single-handedly broke a large chunk of followers away from the Catholic faith…no other man did that and lived to tell about it. So of course Luther has and still continues to have his enemies and fierce critics.

However many of his words were a reflection of Luther and not his true beliefs. He spoke with a fiery and venomous tongue. When the radical reformers decided that Luther’s calls were not enough, they started burning churches. Luther realized he opened Pandora’s box and fell into terrible depression.

Luther was a man who was obsessed with finding out Who God is. That’s why he believed in Sola scriptura, because the closest he could get to God was through Scripture ‘and not Popes or Councils who have often contradicted each other.’ Everything about Luther’s life was how could he “get it right” with God. He was a tormented man and his life shows it, some would say Luther was manic-depressive…I wouldn’t be surprised. However Luther was not Christ, he was just a man and subject to error and misjudgement. However I have the highest respect for him, for he constantly sought out the Lord, rejected the Renaissance influence on the Church and Christian Humanism that man could rationalize his Salvation through good works. Luther believed in Sola fide. Either way Luther was concerned with what God “wanted” and hence he looked to Scripture.

You being a Catholic I’m not saying you should read more into Luther, nor do I expect you to. I am saying is that Luther was a very enigmatic character and one with a fascinating history. Even going to Catholic church, I’m not going to give up my fondness for Luther, he was never against the Roman Catholic Church, just the papacy…I of course have the blessing of seeing Luther’s church endure some 500 years to see how the Catholics (both Latin and Greek) have it right with a papacy, because so many Lutheran denominations strayed from the Bible and since Luther was a man of Scripture…he would be horrified if he was alive today.

 

[aicirt]

Yes I’ve tried LC-MS and it is more faithful to the Bible, and loyal to Luther’s teachings but LCMS high-churches are rare. As for closest to RC, it depends. The NY church I attended to was a high-church in which the worship practices and doctrines are similar to RC…as Lutherans would joke “Catholic-Lite”.

As per your “thumbnail” you missed Luther: The first anti-Semite. There is a lot of criticism of Luther. As should be, he single-handedly broke a large chunk of followers away from the Catholic faith…no other man did that and lived to tell about it. So of course Luther has and still continues to have his enemies and fierce critics.

However many of his words were a reflection of Luther and not his true beliefs. He spoke with a fiery and venomous tongue. When the radical reformers decided that Luther’s calls were not enough, they started burning churches. Luther realized he opened Pandora’s box and fell into terrible depression.

Luther was a man who was obsessed with finding out Who God is. That’s why he believed in Sola scriptura, because the closest he could get to God was through Scripture ‘and not Popes or Councils who have often contradicted each other.’ Everything about Luther’s life was how could he “get it right” with God. He was a tormented man and his life shows it, some would say Luther was manic-depressive…I wouldn’t be surprised. However Luther was not Christ, he was just a man and subject to error and misjudgement. However I have the highest respect for him, for he constantly sought out the Lord, rejected the Renaissance influence on the Church and Christian Humanism that man could rationalize his Salvation through good works. Luther believed in Sola fide. Either way Luther was concerned with what God “wanted” and hence he looked to Scripture.

You being a Catholic I’m not saying you should read more into Luther, nor do I expect you to. I am saying is that Luther was a very enigmatic character and one with a fascinating history. Even going to Catholic church, I’m not going to give up my fondness for Luther, he was never against the Roman Catholic Church, just the papacy…I of course have the blessing of seeing Luther’s church endure some 500 years to see how the Catholics (both Latin and Greek) have it right with a papacy, because so many Lutheran denominations strayed from the Bible and since Luther was a man of Scripture…he would be horrified if he was alive today.

No, I didn’t miss the anti-Semitic part and I saw the part about the bigamy of Phillip II, Annabaptist problem, and his remark, “Better to be Papist than Calvinist.”
I also heard that it is suspected Luther was manic depressive. Just didn’t include everything in my last post.

So if he wasn’t against the RCC but just the papacy, if the RCC had gotten rid of the Pope, Luther would have then been satisfied? I don’t think so because he sure had many issues besides the Church selling indulgences.

And is it true, according to Lutherans, that Luther added “alone” after “faith”? It changed the meaning otherwise he would have had no reason to change it. And his difficulty explaining James 2:24 “by works man is justified, not only by faith.”

Didn’t he try to get rid of James in the Bible along with the seven books in the Bible including Maccebees which talks about Purgatory? He said the RC put that in at the Council of Trent. However, when Gutenberg printed his Catholic Bible years before Luther was born, it was in it.

He also wanted to remove Hebrews and Revelations along with the seven and a few others. What would have been left?

 

[JonNC]

=austenbosten;9392030] Yes I’ve tried LC-MS and it is more faithful to the Bible, and loyal to Luther’s teachings but LCMS high-churches are rare. As for closest to RC, it depends. The NY church I attended to was a high-church in which the worship practices and doctrines are similar to RC…as Lutherans would joke “Catholic-Lite”.

Curiously, probably the highest of high church Lutherans are the ALCC, which has petitioned Rome.

As per your “thumbnail” you missed Luther: The first anti-Semite. There is a lot of criticism of Luther. As should be, he single-handedly broke a large chunk of followers away from the Catholic faith…no other man did that and lived to tell about it. So of course Luther has and still continues to have his enemies and fierce critics.

We do need to be historically accurate here. Luther was not an anti-semite. Anti-semitism is a racial bigotry, and race did not enter into either Luther’s early support for the Jews, nor his later verbal attacks on them. Luther was anti-judaism. And this is also true of much of the European Church at the time. Johannes Eck, for example, wrote some very hateful things about the Jews, but he was not an anti-semite.

Jon

 

[aicirt]

Curiously, probably the highest of high church Lutherans are the ALCC, which has petitioned Rome.

We do need to be historically accurate here. Luther was not an anti-semite. Anti-semitism is a racial bigotry, and race did not enter into either Luther’s early support for the Jews, nor his later verbal attacks on them. Luther was anti-judaism. And this is also true of much of the European Church at the time. Johannes Eck, for example, wrote some very hateful things about the Jews, but he was not an anti-semite.

Jon

And what has Rome said?

It is pretty hard being on the receiving end of anti anything. He supported Jews and then verbally attacked them. Mixed message? One of the things brought out in my little thumg-nail search was he was nice because he wanted to convert them but changed when they didn’t.

 

[austenbosten]

Curiously, probably the highest of high church Lutherans are the ALCC, which has petitioned Rome.

Yeah but there are no ALCC churches where I live.

We do need to be historically accurate here. Luther was not an anti-semite. Anti-semitism is a racial bigotry, and race did not enter into either Luther’s early support for the Jews, nor his later verbal attacks on them. Luther was anti-judaism. And this is also true of much of the European Church at the time. Johannes Eck, for example, wrote some very hateful things about the Jews, but he was not an anti-semite.

Jon

I was saying it within the context that there are numerous criticisms about Luther, which more or less are misunderstandings. Luther was no more an anti-Semite than the average person of his time. Back in those times, people believed the Black Plague was caused because of the Jews. Luther may have said horrid things about Jews that’s undeniable, but he also said this.

“I know that we Germans are brutes and stupid
swine.”

Does that mean he was anti-German?

Luther was a product of his times and he was a man who used strong and harsh language. Luther would be the man who would be another man to near death if that man tried to politically correct his speech…Luther was the epitome of anti-PC. He used strong language and it was indeed effective.

 

[austenbosten]

And what has Rome said?

It is pretty hard being on the receiving end of anti anything. He supported Jews and then verbally attacked them. Mixed message? One of the things brought out in my little thumg-nail search was he was nice because he wanted to convert them but changed when they didn’t.

Well Augustine said that Jews should survive but suffer for Christ’s betrayal and death, and many clergy and Catholics believed in ill-treatment of Jews…then of course Vatican II came along and condemned it all…Mixed message much?

Luther was not the first religious anti-Semite and certainly not the last.

Nowhere in Lutheranism does On the Jews and their Lies is seen as cannon or important reading. Nowhere in Lutheranism was Luther’s views on Jews seen as dogma and the same with the Catholic Church. Ill treatment of Jews although widely accepted by the RCC laity and clergy in the medieval era…was never part of Catholic dogma.

 

[JonNC]

=aicirt;9392464]And what has Rome said?

I believe they are going to part of the Anglican ordinariate, but I’m not sure.

It is pretty hard being on the receiving end of anti anything. He supported Jews and then verbally attacked them. Mixed message? One of the things brought out in my little thumg-nail search was he was nice because he wanted to convert them but changed when they didn’t.

Don’t get me wrong. I wasn’t defending Luther’s anti-judaism, anymore than Catholics today defend the anti-judiaism inside the Church of that time. We’re united in opposition to it.
And you are right: Luther thought that, once the papacy was removed, that the Jews would convert happily. He was disillusioned when they didn’t.

Jon

 

[aicirt]

Well Augustine said that Jews should survive but suffer for Christ’s betrayal and death, and many clergy and Catholics believed in ill-treatment of Jews…then of course Vatican II came along and condemned it all…Mixed message much?

Luther was not the first religious anti-Semite and certainly not the last.

Nowhere in Lutheranism does On the Jews and their Lies is seen as cannon or important reading. Nowhere in Lutheranism was Luther’s views on Jews seen as dogma and the same with the Catholic Church. Ill treatment of Jews although widely accepted by the RCC laity and clergy in the medieval era…was never part of Catholic dogma.

This is the reason I did not bring it up. Whatever happened came to a head with the Holocaust. That was the effect of hundreds of years of bigotry. Let’s hope we’ve all learned that lesson.

We all know that there were many Lutherans, Catholics etc. who risked their lives for the sake of others…including Jews.

 

[aicirt]

I believe they are going to part of the Anglican ordinariate, but I’m not sure.

Don’t get me wrong. I wasn’t defending Luther’s anti-judaism, anymore than Catholics today defend the anti-judiaism inside the Church of that time. We’re united in opposition to it.
And you are right: Luther thought that, once the papacy was removed, that the Jews would convert happily. He was disillusioned when they didn’t.

Jon

Wait…Luther wanted the Papacy removed so the Jews would become Catholics? Why wouldn’t he want them to become Lutherans? Where did he get that idea?

 

[JonNC]

Wait…Luther wanted the Papacy removed so the Jews would become Catholics? Why wouldn’t he want them to become Lutherans? Where did he get that idea?

Perhaps better said; as a result of the fact that the Evangelical (in the Lutheran, European sense) churches were no longer under the papacy, he felt that Jews would more likely become Christian.

Jon