If Luther were alive today, would he be Catholic?

[LutheranScholar]

Nobody likes being accused of bearing false witness, so let me go ahead and back up everything I said first, about St. Francis and next, about Martin Luther, a man remembered in my church’s calendar as a Doctor of the Church.

christianitytoday.com/history/2008/august/meet-st-francis.html

Then one day, as he was riding near Assisi, he met a leper. He had always felt an overpowering horror of these sufferers, but making a great effort, he conquered his aversion, dismounted, and, in giving the leper a coin, kissed his hand. The leper then gave him the kiss of peace, after which Francis remounted his horse and rode on his way.

Luther was extraordinarily successful as a monk. He plunged into prayer, fasting, and ascetic practices—going without sleep, enduring bone-chilling cold without a blanket, and flagellating himself. As he later commented, “If anyone could have earned heaven by the life of a monk, it was I.” christianitytoday.com/history/people/theologians/martin-luther.html

I can’t find that excerpt from where I read of Pope Innocent’s mocking initial reception of St. Francis, but I can say that he obviously had a change of heart toward the man and did endorse Francis’ Order in a limited way. Looking for that passage has actually opened me up to a lot more information about the man, which I would like to share here:
christianhistoryinstitute.org/study/module/francis-of-assisi/,
christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-14/st-francis-of-assisi-on-joy-of-poverty-and-value-of-dung.html,
taylormarshall.com/2010/10/saint-francis-vs-martin-luther-catholic.html,
sfayouth.net/the-protestant-reformation-16th-century-,
encyclopedia.com/topic/Reformation.aspx

I just added the last link because it seems almost like a culmination of some previous reform movements and deserved to be explored.

 

[jcrichton]

That’s very true. Nobody’s an island, but they have their families, old memories, friends of similar backgrounds and experiences and their own lives as well as their faith journeys and those who accompany them on those journeys to draw their impressions from. Just imagine what reading and studying Romans chapter five would have done for somebody whom one could almost call fastidious in his faith such as Martin Luther!

*Peace with God Through Faith

5 Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die—8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.
Death in Adam, Life in Christ

12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because wall sinned—13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for fall men. 19 For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.*

That had to be a powerful revelation to him and it set the tone for the dichotomy of Law and Gospel that he was to later refine in his preaching and writings. A powerful message, indeed. Without doubt, St. Francis and Martin Luther were polar opposites on the pride/ humility spectrum and while Luther struggled with that in his prayers, God seems to have given St. Francis a singular grace in identifying with the poorer people after that episode where he embraced the leper and clothed him, or after he lay in muck after being so scornfully dismissed by the Pope.

…I think it is the very same zealousness that, Inspired by the Holy Spirit, sets each man on that Quest to God–it is how we respond to Grace that allows the Holy Spirit to produce in us acts that both changes the world and advances the Way.

However, man is, too many times, short-sighted and often allows his ego to rule him, rather than the Holy Spirit… St. Francis was Called to build Christ’s Church… yet, in his finite understanding he proceeded to rebuild physical buildings (which on its own was not completely devoid of value) rather than allowing the Holy Spirit to use him to temper/correct the issues within the Mystical Body of Christ. Once the revelation became clear, he set himself to the task. Yet we know that he was alone on this–his family, friends, Clerics, all wanted him to remain silent; he, as St. Peter, decided to listen to God rather than man, including his own fears and insecurities…

…an interesting fact that most may not even notice… St. Francis thought of himself (almost in the vein of St. Paul) as not worthy to hold the office of the Priesthood as he chose to remain the least among the congregation which he was authorized to create.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Nobody likes being accused of bearing false witness, so let me go ahead and back up everything I said first, about St. Francis and next, about Martin Luther, a man remembered in my church’s calendar as a Doctor of the Church.

christianitytoday.com/history/2008/august/meet-st-francis.html

Then one day, as he was riding near Assisi, he met a leper. He had always felt an overpowering horror of these sufferers, but making a great effort, he conquered his aversion, dismounted, and, in giving the leper a coin, kissed his hand. The leper then gave him the kiss of peace, after which Francis remounted his horse and rode on his way.

Luther was extraordinarily successful as a monk. He plunged into prayer, fasting, and ascetic practices—going without sleep, enduring bone-chilling cold without a blanket, and flagellating himself. As he later commented, “If anyone could have earned heaven by the life of a monk, it was I.” christianitytoday.com/history/people/theologians/martin-luther.html

I can’t find that excerpt from where I read of Pope Innocent’s mocking initial reception of St. Francis, but I can say that he obviously had a change of heart toward the man and did endorse Francis’ Order in a limited way. Looking for that passage has actually opened me up to a lot more information about the man, which I would like to share here:
christianhistoryinstitute.org/study/module/francis-of-assisi/,
christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-14/st-francis-of-assisi-on-joy-of-poverty-and-value-of-dung.html,
taylormarshall.com/2010/10/saint-francis-vs-martin-luther-catholic.html,
sfayouth.net/the-protestant-reformation-16th-century-,
encyclopedia.com/topic/Reformation.aspx

I just added the last link because it seems almost like a culmination of some previous reform movements and deserved to be explored.

…to your final statement… it is the reason why I believe that it was the Holy Spirit that Called both men (St. Francis and Luther); much as the general revelation that man gets (discoveries, theories, laws…) the Holy Spirit is at Work Bringing God’s Creation to its Fullness:

But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth. For he shall not speak of himself; but what things soever he shall hear, he shall speak; and the things that are to come, he shall shew you. (St. John 16:13)

17 For she goeth about seeking such as are worthy of her, and she sheweth herself to them cheerfully in the ways, and meeteth them with all providence. 18 For the beginning of her is the most true desire of discipline. 19 And the care of discipline is love: and love is the keeping of her laws: and the keeping of her laws is the firm foundation of incorruption: 20 And incorruption bringeth near to God. (Wisdom 6:17-20)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[catholic1seeks]

…to your final statement… it is the reason why I believe that it was the Holy Spirit that Called both men (St. Francis and Luther); much as the general revelation that man gets (discoveries, theories, laws…) the Holy Spirit is at Work Bringing God’s Creation to its Fullness:

Maran atha!

Angel

God uses all men, for he desires all to be saved.

It is one thing to say that God’s grace guides all and another to say that an individual is invested with a type of authority to start a new Christian movement at odds with the church in union with Peter, the church “which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.”

Irenaeus, from the2nd century, goes on to say:

“With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (Against Heresies 3:3:2).

And what could be the reason for this, except that God made Peter the rock of his church, gave him the keys of the kingdom, and so made him chief steward over the church (Matthew 16:18-19)

 

[catholic1seeks]

No he would not and for much the same reasons he broke away from Rome in 1517. The Papacy still holds unbiblical views in its claims to power, the current Pope seems more interested in cowtowing to the politically correct crowd than preaching the Gospel, while Pope Leo X cared about financing a Basilica with other people’s money and reacted badly to any challenge to his authority. Luther cared more about correct doctrine being taught everywhere. Have you seen how liberal so many American Catholic dioceses have become?

The Roman Catholic tradition is not subordinate to that of Holy Scripture, but is held as equal to it. The Catholic Church encourages a semi-Pelagian view that one can cooperate in one’s own salvation, rather than justification and sanctification being entirely a work of the Holy Spirit, as both the Scripture and Luther teach. To quote our Church President: " Lutheranism is not a confessing movement in the Church Catholic, it’s the Catholic Church gone right!"

The authority of bishops means nothing more than administering the Sacraments, preaching the Gospel, excommunicating impenitent sinners and readmitting those who repent. To claim that someone on earth has the authority of Christ Himself is a grievous heresy indeed. There remains much work to be done if Confessional Lutheranism is ever to admit the Roman Catholic Church among its ranks.

Of course, you as a non-Catholic will have your views of Christian doctrine that are at odds with the Catholic view. So it is not enough to say the Catholic view is unbiblical or anti-Christian, for both sides, after all, are using the Bible and the Christian testimony that preceded us.

And I’m sure others have responded to this post already. I have not kept up with this thread, for it was moved from the forum I originally posted in and had no clue where it went

But just how you responded concerns me. Intentionally or not, you set it up as Luther vs. Catholic Church. And that right there is the issue. No matter how saintly or prophetic a single individual is, that individual is not granted the same promises as the entire church and its fundamental origin on the cornerstone, Christ, and the Apostolic founders – chief of which is Peter, the “rock”. Protestants may think we give the Pope too much or “unbiblical” authority. We do have our biblical passages and historical reasons. But it would seem non-Catholics, knowlingly or not, give Luther a supreme authority. There is the confidence that he got it right, that he knew better than the entire church.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Of course, you as a non-Catholic will have your views of Christian doctrine that are at odds with the Catholic view. So it is not enough to say the Catholic view is unbiblical or anti-Christian, for both sides, after all, are using the Bible and the Christian testimony that preceded us.

And I’m sure others have responded to this post already. I have not kept up with this thread, for it was moved from the forum I originally posted in and had no clue where it went

But just how you responded concerns me. Intentionally or not, you set it up as Luther vs. Catholic Church. And that right there is the issue. No matter how saintly or prophetic a single individual is, that individual is not granted the same promises as the entire church and its fundamental origin on the cornerstone, Christ, and the Apostolic founders – chief of which is Peter, the “rock”. Protestants may think we give the Pope too much or “unbiblical” authority. We do have our biblical passages and historical reasons.** But it would seem non-Catholics, knowlingly or not, give Luther a supreme authority.** There is the confidence that he got it right, that he knew better than the entire church.

Final authority is always given to Christ and Him alone. Luther was one person who with other people sought to reform the Church Catholic and in our Confessions, we have quotations from the Bible as well as the Church Fathers which explain our position and state the continuity of our faith from the Apostles, through the Reformers and down to the present day. I’ll provide the preamble from the Testimonies section and provide the link to the rest.

<
To Top

Introduction

*The Catalog of Testimonies was an appendix to the Book of Concord, included with most printings of the German edition in 1580. Though not a formal part of the Lutheran Confessions, per se, the Catalog of Testimonies was widely used and provides additional documentation and evidence for the Lutheran position on the doctrine of the two natures in Christ. This became particularly important in Lutheranism’s debates with Calvinism over the possibility of the actual presence of the body and blood of Christ under the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper. Scripture passages and quotations from church fathers on the person of Christ are cited, with a special focus on the fact that because of the Incarnation the human nature of Christ shares in the qualities of divinity.

The Catalog of Testimonies

Both of Scripture and Orthodox Antiquity
Which show not only What Either has Taught concerning the person and the Divine Majesty of the Human Nature of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Exalted to the Right Hand of God’s Omnipotence, but also what form of Speech Either Has Used
by Jakob Andreae (1528-1590)
and Martin Chemnitz (1522-1586)
To the Christian Reader

1] Since, especially in the article of the Person of Christ, some have without reason asserted that in the Book of Concord there is a deviation from phrasibus and modis loquendi, that is, the phrases and modes of speech of [received and approved by] the ancient pure Church and fathers, and that, on the contrary, new, strange, self-devised, unusual and unheard-of expressions are introduced; and since the testimonies of the ancient Church and fathers to which this book appeals proved somewhat too extended to be incorporated in it, and having been carefully excerpted, were afterwards delivered to several electors and princes, –

2] [Therefore] they are printed in goodly number as an appendix at the end of this book, in regard to particular points, for the purpose of furnishing a correct and thorough account to the Christian reader, whereby he may perceive and readily discover that in the aforesaid book nothing new has been introduced either in rebus (matter) or in phrasibus (expressions), that is, neither as regards the doctrine nor the manner of teaching it, but that we have taught and spoken concerning this mystery just as, first of all, the Holy Scriptures and afterwards the ancient pure Church have done.*

bookofconcord.org/testimonies.php

Martin Luther did not seek separation from the early Church Catholic, he sought a return to its earlier emphases and principles. I’ve stated elsewhere that Martin Luther in no way acted alone, nor was his following limited to certain electors. Theologians sided with him and their Evangelical emphases convinced many in that part of Europe that their views were biblical, apostolic and correct.

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

Final authority is always given to Christ and Him alone. Luther was one person who with other people sought to reform the Church Catholic and in our Confessions, we have quotations from the Bible as well as the Church Fathers which explain our position and state the continuity of our faith from the Apostles, through the Reformers and down to the present day. I’ll provide the preamble from the Testimonies section and provide the link to the rest.

<
To Top

Introduction

*The Catalog of Testimonies was an appendix to the Book of Concord, included with most printings of the German edition in 1580. Though not a formal part of the Lutheran Confessions, per se, the Catalog of Testimonies was widely used and provides additional documentation and evidence for the Lutheran position on the doctrine of the two natures in Christ. This became particularly important in Lutheranism’s debates with Calvinism over the possibility of the actual presence of the body and blood of Christ under the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper. Scripture passages and quotations from church fathers on the person of Christ are cited, with a special focus on the fact that because of the Incarnation the human nature of Christ shares in the qualities of divinity.

The Catalog of Testimonies

Both of Scripture and Orthodox Antiquity
Which show not only What Either has Taught concerning the person and the Divine Majesty of the Human Nature of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Exalted to the Right Hand of God’s Omnipotence, but also what form of Speech Either Has Used
by Jakob Andreae (1528-1590)
and Martin Chemnitz (1522-1586)
To the Christian Reader

1] Since, especially in the article of the Person of Christ, some have without reason asserted that in the Book of Concord there is a deviation from phrasibus and modis loquendi, that is, the phrases and modes of speech of [received and approved by] the ancient pure Church and fathers, and that, on the contrary, new, strange, self-devised, unusual and unheard-of expressions are introduced; and since the testimonies of the ancient Church and fathers to which this book appeals proved somewhat too extended to be incorporated in it, and having been carefully excerpted, were afterwards delivered to several electors and princes, –

2] [Therefore] they are printed in goodly number as an appendix at the end of this book, in regard to particular points, for the purpose of furnishing a correct and thorough account to the Christian reader, whereby he may perceive and readily discover that in the aforesaid book nothing new has been introduced either in rebus (matter) or in phrasibus (expressions), that is, neither as regards the doctrine nor the manner of teaching it, but that we have taught and spoken concerning this mystery just as, first of all, the Holy Scriptures and afterwards the ancient pure Church have done.*

bookofconcord.org/testimonies.php

Martin Luther did not seek separation from the early Church Catholic, he sought a return to its earlier emphases and principles. I’ve stated elsewhere that Martin Luther in no way acted alone, nor was his following limited to certain electors. Theologians sided with him and their Evangelical emphases convinced many in that part of Europe that their views were biblical, apostolic and correct.

There were many who tried to reform the Church. Unlike Luther, they stayed in.

 

[LutheranScholar]

There were many who tried to reform the Church. Unlike Luther, they stayed in.

Luther, to put it simply, was excommunicated by a Bull published by Pope Leo X. He didn’t storm out of the Church, he was rejected by the Roman hierarchy, which he rejected in turn ( he publicly burned the Bull of Excommunication). He continued in his tireless work for the Church in the face of great danger and overwhelming odds.
luther.de/en/worms.html

greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/martin-luther.html

ccel.org/ccel/luther

luther.de/en/bann.html

 

[jcrichton]

God uses all men, for he desires all to be saved.

It is one thing to say that God’s grace guides all and another to say that an individual is invested with a type of authority to start a new Christian movement at odds with the church in union with Peter, the church “which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.”

Irenaeus, from the2nd century, goes on to say:

“With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (Against Heresies 3:3:2).

And what could be the reason for this, except that God made Peter the rock of his church, gave him the keys of the kingdom, and so made him chief steward over the church (Matthew 16:18-19)

Hi!
I concur with you… the discovery of the various elements or the invention of the printing press or photography would demonstrate Divine Inspiration and Revelation–still, not a single hint of “start a new Body of Christ.”

Conversely, when the Church needs Reformation, the Holy Spirit chooses from amongst the Believers and even from amongst the mundane to bring forth the needed Reformation–however, man being man, God’s Reformation does not always takes place through the awakening of those chosen by God. Sometimes something as simple as humility is lacking or the person’s egocentrism rises above his/her humility and erodes the vision/quest to which he/she was Guided/Inspired.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[johnnyc176]

Luther was all about ‘my will’ instead of Thy Will. He would fall right in line with liberals whose pride gets in the way of their following the Truth of Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church. In other words he would still be protestant.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Luther was all about ‘my will’ instead of Thy Will. He would fall right in line with liberals whose pride gets in the way of their following the Truth of Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church. In other words he would still be protestant.

To be perfectly fair, Luther wasn’t quite as selfish as some people here attempt to set him up as being, nor was he overly liberal in his attitudes. He was squarely on the side of the nobility during the Peasant’s War and he refused to compromise his position on the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. He translated the Bible into German and kept to the teachings of the Scriptures and the Early Church Fathers, as the Confessions and the Catalogue of Testimonies attest. He never left Christ’s Church, but he did initiate some much needed reforms.

 

[rcwitness]

Final authority is always given to Christ and Him alone.

If this were true, you would have the gift of Infalibility with Universal Jurisdiction.

 

[Peter_J]

Luther was all about ‘my will’ instead of Thy Will. He would fall right in line with liberals whose pride gets in the way of their following the Truth of Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church. In other words he would still be protestant.

We’re talking about Luther, not Lucifer. (Not that I’m one to defend Luther, but I thought it best to distinguish those two names before this become an embarrassment. )

 

[LutheranScholar]

If this were true, you would have the gift of Infalibility with Universal Jurisdiction.

According to who? I won’t sully myself with unnecessary polemic here, but I will say that there are two things that need to be reviewed here: the character of Martin Luther, who championed Reformation and the importance of Faith over works and the implication that I and others like me are liars because we say that Jesus Christ is the Head of His Holy Christian Church because our traditions have no need of a human head to represent us before God ( Jesus Himself at the Right Hand of God Almighty is quite good enough for us, thank you!). Jesus Himself has the Universal Jurisdiction of which you speak.

Martin Luther was a man God used to reform His Church. One man out of many, who had the same failings and foibles everybody else has had since the fall of Adam. He was earnest, sincere and zealous in his mission to reform the Church. He was rejected, threatened with death and anathematized, as were his followers, by the papacy. He was not rejected by Christ. The fruits of his labors bear witness to that. He retained the sacraments, put the Law and Gospel in their proper place and made sure tradition was subordinate to Scripture. He wrote not one but two catechisms that swept away the extra dross and put the emphasis right back to where it belonged: the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. The Lutheran Confessions remain the unchanging guideposts that, in line with Biblical teaching, remain the set standard of Confessional Lutheran Christianity.

Nobody likes to be called a liar, except maybe the Devil, who speaks out of his own character when he lies. I say that Jesus Christ is the Head of His Holy, Apostolic Christian Church. That basic, essential truth is shockingly questioned by somebody who would say that if my words are true, then I would be, in essence, a pope. I dare not claim such an office, but I will point to Jesus’ words ( which happen to be my Confirmation verse) as recorded in the Gospel of John, in the fifth verse of the fifteenth chapter: " I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing." The fruits of Lutheran Christianity have been multiple.
A liturgy in the language of the people, set forth by Christ’s own Institution, recent conversions in Africa of people to the Light of the Gospel, a Bible translated to the vernacular and made available to the people ( make of that what you will), an emphasis on faith and the activity of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the people and a set standard of Christian Faith and Life given to us in the Lutheran Confessions.

This will be my last post in this particular thread, for the sake of my own peace of mind. Some people can only bolster up their own faith by bashing others and I have tried to avoid doing so ( at least in recent days). The Christian response is forgiveness and prayer. I don’t insist that you sacrifice your faith and join mine because I can spew forth all kinds of literature ( I can, but it isn’t necessary) from my tradition that rather predictably says that we are right and you are wrong. Of course, the Lutheran Confessions don’t actually insist on that kind of institutional conformity. Where the Gospels are preached and the Sacraments are correctly administered, there is the Church. May you find peace and the consolation of the Holy Spirit in yours.

 

[rcwitness]

According to who? I won’t sully myself with unnecessary polemic here, but I will say that there are two things that need to be reviewed here: the character of Martin Luther, who championed Reformation and the importance of Faith over works and the implication that I and others like me are liars because we say that Jesus Christ is the Head of His Holy Christian Church because our traditions have no need of a human head to represent us before God ( Jesus Himself at the Right Hand of God Almighty is quite good enough for us, thank you!). Jesus Himself has the Universal Jurisdiction of which you speak.

Martin Luther was a man God used to reform His Church. One man out of many, who had the same failings and foibles everybody else has had since the fall of Adam. He was earnest, sincere and zealous in his mission to reform the Church. He was rejected, threatened with death and anathematized, as were his followers, by the papacy. He was not rejected by Christ. The fruits of his labors bear witness to that. He retained the sacraments, put the Law and Gospel in their proper place and made sure tradition was subordinate to Scripture. He wrote not one but two catechisms that swept away the extra dross and put the emphasis right back to where it belonged: the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. The Lutheran Confessions remain the unchanging guideposts that, in line with Biblical teaching, remain the set standard of Confessional Lutheran Christianity.

Nobody likes to be called a liar, except maybe the Devil, who speaks out of his own character when he lies. I say that Jesus Christ is the Head of His Holy, Apostolic Christian Church. That basic, essential truth is shockingly questioned by somebody who would say that if my words are true, then I would be, in essence, a pope. I dare not claim such an office, but I will point to Jesus’ words ( which happen to be my Confirmation verse) as recorded in the Gospel of John, in the fifth verse of the fifteenth chapter: " I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing." The fruits of Lutheran Christianity have been multiple.
A liturgy in the language of the people, set forth by Christ’s own Institution, recent conversions in Africa of people to the Light of the Gospel, a Bible translated to the vernacular and made available to the people ( make of that what you will), an emphasis on faith and the activity of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the people and a set standard of Christian Faith and Life given to us in the Lutheran Confessions.

This will be my last post in this particular thread, for the sake of my own peace of mind. Some people can only bolster up their own faith by bashing others and I have tried to avoid doing so ( at least in recent days). The Christian response is forgiveness and prayer. I don’t insist that you sacrifice your faith and join mine because I can spew forth all kinds of literature ( I can, but it isn’t necessary) from my tradition that rather predictably says that we are right and you are wrong. Of course, the Lutheran Confessions don’t actually insist on that kind of institutional conformity. Where the Gospels are preached and the Sacraments are correctly administered, there is the Church. May you find peace and the consolation of the Holy Spirit in yours.

Please try to not take offense. My statement was merely in direct response to your claim, that you (and your church) ALWAYS give final authority to Christ and Him alone. That is a bold claim, ya know? No less bold than the Catholic Tradition that Jesus gives His Keys of authority to Peter and his successors.

You acknowledge that Martin had faults, but then claim he was sent by God to reform the Church. I can believe that in part… that is, that he was “one crying out for reform of practice (abuse) and clarity of doctrine”. However, the Church discerns what is from above and what are from people like Martin’s heterodox opinions.

I am willing to recognize alot of good from him. And that in these times, he is afforded more open minded and fair consideration for his teachings. In the end, it’s what the Church can affirm of his faith that is from above. Just like a pope might have heterodox opinions and fail in honoring Sacraments and Teachings. Martin married a prince after the pope denied annulling his marriage. This was an abuse of the Sacrament, no? That leaves room for reform in himself.

 

[gcnuss]

In answer to the question presented, I imagine that if Luther’s life followed a similar path as in the 16th century – joining the Augustinians, being ordained, and becoming an academic theologian – he might well be a Catholic today.

In our time, he would not have the the sale of indulgences by Tetzel to rail against and, therefore, would not have written the 95 Theses which are widely regarded as the spark that started the fire of the Reformation. No spark, no fire.

 

[rcwitness]

In answer to the question presented, I imagine that if Luther’s life followed a similar path as in the 16th century – joining the Augustinians, being ordained, and becoming an academic theologian – he might well be a Catholic today.

In our time, he would not have the the sale of indulgences by Tetzel to rail against and, therefore, would not have written the 95 Theses which are widely regarded as the spark that started the fire of the Reformation. No spark, no fire.

Would you stand against abuse of Indulgences but not children? I hear ya, but there is usually some form of abuse that needs reform and brings shame to certain members of leadership. I think each generation has its own challenges…

 

[gcnuss]

Would you stand against abuse of Indulgences but not children? I hear ya, but there is usually some form of abuse that needs reform and brings shame to certain members of leadership. I think each generation has its own challenges…

Of course I would stand up against the abuse of children. However, I think the two cases of abuse and the reactions against those who called them out were much different. In Luther’s case, he was treated as a dangerous heretic for questioning the sale of indulgences and the power of those who allowed their sale. Luther went up against formidable ecclesial and political power.

I don’t think those who called out the child abusers met the same opposition (although I am no expert on all that went on in dealing with the child abuse.) They did not face the power of church and empire that Luther faced.

Just a couple of thoughts.

 

[rcwitness]

Of course I would stand up against the abuse of children. However, I think the two cases of abuse and the reactions against those who called them out were much different. In Luther’s case, he was treated as a dangerous heretic for questioning the sale of indulgences and the power of those who allowed their sale. Luther went up against formidable ecclesial and political power.

I don’t think those who called out the child abusers met the same opposition (although I am no expert on all that went on in dealing with the child abuse.) They did not face the power of church and empire that Luther faced.

Just a couple of thoughts.

I see. I am not under the impression that Luther met any resistance at all for speaking out against the sale of Indulgences. Maybe you know of evidence of that?

I think part of the problem with Luther, was that he threw too many accusations at the Church and it got complicated to address them individually. And the Church has recognized guilt on clergy members probably in this regard also. They did not handle Luther very well. Though, he was afforded some respect by hearing and debating. More acknowledgment for his just accusations would have been good.

 

[Peter_J]

Luther, to put it simply, was excommunicated by a Bull published by Pope Leo X.

True.

I’d like to throw this question out to anyone who may happen to know: is there agreement among historians as to whether Rome *chose *not to burn Luther at the stake (or whatever the case may have been), or whether Rome simply never had the chance to do so?

Needless (I hope!) to say, I would very much like to think that Rome never wanted to burn him at the stake (notwithstanding great dislike for his actions) but I really don’t know.