If Luther were alive today, would he be Catholic?

[susanlo]

Did the pope remove power from those who protected Luther?

I am not really sure how you want me to answer this. I don’t think that the Pope and Emperor knew that Frederick the Wise was the one who staged the abduction and hid him at Wartburg Castle. Very few people knew where he was because he was hiding from being arrested. If they knew Frederick the Wise abducted him, then he would have been a criminal as stated in the Edict of Worms for hiding him. They didn’t find Luther or become aware that Frederick the Wise hid him.

By the time Luther emerged from hiding, there had been uprisings and revolts and the princes of the area were starting to adopt ‘Lutheranism.’ There was much war and fighting and I really know little of all of the complexities involved. Anyway, I am sure by this point the Pope had declared these “Lutheran” princes and leaders heretics for many reasons. The fact that Luther was there was a moot point. There were military attacks against these regions to try and stop the spread of Lutheranism. It was a volatile and complicated time, and I am not exactly sure about all of the details.

 

[susanlo]

I disagree with this. Just because the two governments “worked together” doesn’t mean they were one and the same. They had separate courts. There were, as there is today, separate offices with different duties. Only then, the secular recognized the Church as a higher authority.

What ‘secular’ crime did the ‘secular’ authorities put Luther on trial for?

 

[rcwitness]

I am not really sure how you want me to answer this. I don’t think that the Pope and Emperor knew that Frederick the Wise was the one who staged the abduction and hid him at Wartburg Castle. Very few people knew where he was because he was hiding from being arrested. If they knew Frederick the Wise abducted him, then he would have been a criminal as stated in the Edict of Worms for hiding him. They didn’t find Luther or become aware that Frederick the Wise hid him.

By the time Luther emerged from hiding, there had been uprisings and revolts and the princes of the area were starting to adopt ‘Lutheranism.’ There was much war and fighting and I really know little of all of the complexities involved. Anyway, I am sure by this point the Pope had declared these “Lutheran” princes and leaders heretics for many reasons. The fact that Luther was there was a moot point. There were military attacks against these regions to try and stop the spread of Lutheranism. It was a volatile and complicated time, and I am not exactly sure about all of the details.

I see. I would like to know more too.

 

[rcwitness]

What ‘secular’ crime did the ‘secular’ authorities put Luther on trial for?

Good question. Probably heresy. It sounds like the Church tried to persuade the secular authorities to convict him. But the highest “punishment” the Church could exercise is excommunication. So perhaps they did want him executed. I would think they would prefer to work it out without secular authorities, but Martin wasn’t keeping his heterodoxy private.

 

[Peter_J]

Good question. Probably heresy. It sounds like the Church tried to persuade the secular authorities to convict him. But the highest “punishment” the Church could exercise is excommunication.

I think I’ve been on the Internet too long … When I read that sentence I thought you meant excommunication being higher than execution.

 

[MaryT777]

I think I’ve been on the Internet too long … When I read that sentence I thought you meant excommunication being higher than execution.

Maybe a new thread regarding the intentions of the Catholic Church regarding the potential execution of Luther is in order. This thread is simply would he be Catholic if he were alive today,

 

[Peter_J]

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.

FWIW, I’m a lifelong Catholic and I cannot figure out what rcwitness meant by “If this were true, you would have the gift of Infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction” … but that does not necessarily mean that it was anything offensive.

 

[LutheranScholar]

FWIW, I’m a lifelong Catholic and I cannot figure out what rcwitness meant by “If this were true, you would have the gift of Infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction” … but that does not necessarily mean that it was anything offensive.

Nor did I take such offense. I was very surprised that another Christian would dispute the Lordship of Christ over His own Church ( yes, " every minute, every hour, every single day"), irrespective of denomination, branch or what have you. Jesus Christ is the One Who has the whole Infallibility and Universal Jurisdiction ( who can even question that He is without error or that He reigns over all His Church?) and that’s something** everybody** agrees on ( at least, that is what I thought), whether one is Lutheran, Anglican, Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Reformed, Presbyterian, Baptist, Disciple, Mennonite, Quaker or what have you. I’ve visited quite a few churches in my day and the major points of agreement center on the Lordship of Jesus Christ not only over His Church, but over all the Earth. I just don’t see how something that fundamental could actually be up for debate.

 

[Michael68]

I think Luther would be Catholic today and ashamed of the Protestant churches that have so much division.

 

[MaryT777]

Nor did I take such offense. I was very surprised that another Christian would dispute the Lordship of Christ over His own Church ( yes, " every minute, every hour, every single day"), irrespective of denomination, branch or what have you. Jesus Christ is the One Who has the whole Infallibility and Universal Jurisdiction ( who can even question that He is without error or that He reigns over all His Church?) and that’s something** everybody** agrees on ( at least, that is what I thought), whether one is Lutheran, Anglican, Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Reformed, Presbyterian, Baptist, Disciple, Mennonite, Quaker or what have you. I’ve visited quite a few churches in my day and the major points of agreement center on the Lordship of Jesus Christ not only over His Church, but over all the Earth. I just don’t see how something that fundamental could actually be up for debate.

Catechism of the Catholic Church: (free online via google search)

669: As Lord, Christ is also head of the Church, which is his body…

792: Christ is the head of the body, the Church. He is the principle of creation and redemption. Raised to the Father’s glory, “in everything he is preeminent, especially in the Church, through whom he extends his reign over all things.”

 

[LutheranScholar]

Catechism of the Catholic Church: (free online via google search)

669: As Lord, Christ is also head of the Church, which is his body…

792: Christ is the head of the body, the Church. He is the principle of creation and redemption. Raised to the Father’s glory, “in everything he is preeminent, especially in the Church, through whom he extends his reign over all things.”

Article III of the Augsburg Confession:
Article III: Of the Son of God.

1] Also they teach that the Word, that is, the Son of God, did assume the human nature in 2] the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary, so that there are two natures, the divine and the human, inseparably enjoined in one Person, one Christ, true God and true man, who was born of the Virgin Mary, truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and 3] buried, that He might reconcile the Father unto us, and be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men.

4] He also descended into hell, and truly rose again the third day; afterward He ascended into heaven that He might sit on the right hand of the Father, and forever reign and have dominion over all creatures, and sanctify 5] them that believe in Him, by sending the Holy Ghost into their hearts, to rule, comfort, and quicken them, and to defend them against the devil and the power of sin.

6] The same Christ shall openly come again to judge the quick and the dead, etc., according to the Apostles’ Creed. www.bookofconcord.com

As concerning the One, Holy, Christian Church…
Article VII: Of the Church.

1] Also they teach that one holy Church is to continue forever. The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered.

2] And to the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and 3] the administration of the Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike. 4] As Paul says: One faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, etc. Eph. 4:5-6. www.bookofconcord.com

 

[Peter_J]

Originally Posted by Peter J
FWIW, I’m a lifelong Catholic and I cannot figure out what rcwitness meant by “If this were true, you would have the gift of Infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction” … but that does not necessarily mean that it was anything offensive.

Well, regardless of not understanding the statement in question, I’m pretty sure that the “if” part of it was crucial*. But I’ll leave further discussion of it to you and rcwitness.

• If it isn’t I’ll eat my mouse.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Well, regardless of not understanding the statement in question, I’m pretty sure that the “if” part of it was crucial*. But I’ll leave further discussion of it to you and rcwitness.

• If it isn’t I’ll eat my mouse.

" Final Authority is always given to Christ and to Him alone" were my exact words. Christ always has the last say, He is undisputed Lord of His Church. That authority is delegated on earth to those who preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments, His " under shepherds," if you like. Everything is subordinate to the Scriptures, even tradition, in our church. God’s Holy Spirit inspired men to transcribe the Gospels and certain Ecumenical Councils ( guided by said Holy Spirit) determined the content of those Scriptures and when Luther transcribed the Bible into German, he left out the Apocrypha beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-luther-removed-2-maccabees-from.html.

" If this were true, you would have the gift of Infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction." That reply produced a physical reaction. Unfortunately, I was drinking my tea at the time and spewed it all over this monitor after reading that reply. I’m perfectly willing to admit I misunderstood RC Witness and I fervently hope I did, but what my brain processed was this: " If Jesus Christ really were Lord of His own Church, you would have the gift of infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction.“There may be two working and dissimilar understandings of the word " church,” as well. I use it to mean the entire global Christian Community, every branch that accepts the Nicene Creed and the rulings of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. He might have meant the Roman Catholic Church and interpreted my words as being applicable only to the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod in my mind. If I were in any way unclear, I offer my apologies ( again) and hope this clears it up.

 

[Peter_J]

I had to go back and see what was said,

Originally Posted by LutheranScholar
Final authority is always given to Christ and Him alone.

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

As I said, I don’t understand that assertion either … I guess I should leave it to rcwitness to explain.

Guess I don’t have the gift of infallibility.

 

[MaryT777]

I had to go back and see what was said,

As I said, I don’t understand that assertion either … I guess I should leave it to rcwitness to explain.

Guess I don’t have the gift of infallibility.

The intent of the statement by rcwitness seemed quite clear to me as a Catholic, but given we have misunderstanding regarding the statement by not only a Lutheran but a fellow Catholic, hopefully rc witness will clarify the statement.

I think a mountain of misunderstanding has happened here.

 

[johnnyc176]

Luther like all protestants 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.

 

[Wannano]

Luther like all protestants 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.

Wow, thanks johnnyc176, you saved my day. PETER J almost had me convinced Protestants had a monopoly on judgementalism. :harp:

 

[Peter_J]

Hey don’t make me come over there! npatrol:

 

[Wannano]

Hey don’t make me come over there! npatrol:

……:nope::nope:

 

[Peter_J]

Sorry, I meant maketh.