Thanks, Christine. I agree with you. The polemics of 500 hundred years ago ought to be remembered, often condemned on both sides, but never repeated. I might add that our agreements are far greater than the differences.
Jon
- Status
Jon
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Thank you Jon. My brother in law is a Lutheran minister, and he sends me his sermons weekly. He does the same readings that I hear each week in Catholic mass. I have learned a lot from his sermons; he goes into more depth than our priest does in his homily. Although we have had disagreements, they are not as important as the fact that we both believe in the Trinity and faith in Christ. Many of my family members are atheists and Buddists. I feel I have more in common with him than with them.
J
JRKH
Guest
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
I stand corrected, and apologize.
J
jmcrae
Guest
On this, you and I agree.
O
OneTrueCathApos
Guest
Let’s stay on track here my Protestant friends,
Back to Luther:
**Luther’s Doctrines and teachings have some undesirable side-effects which are not usually considered by Protestants. A typical response of Protestants (which there were many here) when confronted with these is to deny that they follow Luther’s teachings but, rather, that they follow the bible. But this response is a weak one when you consider that Luther’s Doctrine’s form the basis for Protestanism… Luther was the first to come up with the following Doctrines (although Protestants will typically wrongly ascribe some of them to church Fathers such as Augustine)
Sola Fida
Sola Scripture
Predestination
Assurance of Salvation
Total Depravity
The Catholic church is Apostate
Any believer can correctly interpret Scripture
Ordained ministers (anyone can be ordained if they believe they are called)
The church is a visible human institution (but not a unified institution)
The supreme importance of preaching
These Protestant Doctrines form the core of Protestanism. If you take these away, there is not much left in Protestanism except those foundational Doctrine’s which were developed in the early church councils.**
Back to Luther:
**Luther’s Doctrines and teachings have some undesirable side-effects which are not usually considered by Protestants. A typical response of Protestants (which there were many here) when confronted with these is to deny that they follow Luther’s teachings but, rather, that they follow the bible. But this response is a weak one when you consider that Luther’s Doctrine’s form the basis for Protestanism… Luther was the first to come up with the following Doctrines (although Protestants will typically wrongly ascribe some of them to church Fathers such as Augustine)
Sola Fida
Sola Scripture
Predestination
Assurance of Salvation
Total Depravity
The Catholic church is Apostate
Any believer can correctly interpret Scripture
Ordained ministers (anyone can be ordained if they believe they are called)
The church is a visible human institution (but not a unified institution)
The supreme importance of preaching
These Protestant Doctrines form the core of Protestanism. If you take these away, there is not much left in Protestanism except those foundational Doctrine’s which were developed in the early church councils.**
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
OneFalseCathApos:
You need to get schooled up on Luther, Calvin, and Arminius. You’re obviously confused if you’re ascribing all these to Luther.
You are also ignorant in your “knowledge” of Protestantism. Where is the Anglican line of the Protestant Church?
You’re showing your true colors again. You’re trying to incite and belittle, rather than enter into serious debate and conversation. And you still won’t cite your source on the quote you’ve been asked so much on this thread.
You’re a bully, my friend. When you’re caught or challenged, you can only insult instead of apologize or admit you could be mistaken.
I don’t have a problem with Catholicism - it is a wonderful church and expression of Christian faith. I do have a problem with your disingenuity.
You need to get schooled up on Luther, Calvin, and Arminius. You’re obviously confused if you’re ascribing all these to Luther.
You are also ignorant in your “knowledge” of Protestantism. Where is the Anglican line of the Protestant Church?
You’re showing your true colors again. You’re trying to incite and belittle, rather than enter into serious debate and conversation. And you still won’t cite your source on the quote you’ve been asked so much on this thread.
You’re a bully, my friend. When you’re caught or challenged, you can only insult instead of apologize or admit you could be mistaken.
I don’t have a problem with Catholicism - it is a wonderful church and expression of Christian faith. I do have a problem with your disingenuity.
O
OneTrueCathApos
Guest
Luther has inadvertently created two categories of believers:
1.) Those with strong faith who should be allowed complete freedom and
2.) Those with weak faith who need rules imposed upon them so they don’t live wicked lives and fall away from true faith.
The problem with Luther’s system is that it implies that the amount of faith necessary for salvation is too small to result in good works. therefore, the ministers have to fill the gap through their strong leadership in which they impose rules of conduct and regular exhortation to be good.
Oh, I wanted to quote where I got Luther’s statements about the Jews and how much he disliked them were from the book “The Jews and Their Lies”.
Is this what Protestanism is really about?
1.) Those with strong faith who should be allowed complete freedom and
2.) Those with weak faith who need rules imposed upon them so they don’t live wicked lives and fall away from true faith.
The problem with Luther’s system is that it implies that the amount of faith necessary for salvation is too small to result in good works. therefore, the ministers have to fill the gap through their strong leadership in which they impose rules of conduct and regular exhortation to be good.
Oh, I wanted to quote where I got Luther’s statements about the Jews and how much he disliked them were from the book “The Jews and Their Lies”.
Is this what Protestanism is really about?
N
notsmart
Guest
Don’t let him be the one to make your opinion of the catholic church change. He may be a new convert, it sounds like it to me but- even if I am wrong he is surely not representative of the kind of catholics I have encountered here.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
What is the primary source? Anyone can say anything about anybody - doesn’t make it true or accurate.
Did you bother to do the research to see if Luther REALLY said what you quoted? It is quite possible you are perpetuating a lie.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
No worries. I know that some Catholics here have tried to shut him up, too - with no luck.
No, the core of all Christian teaching is, at least for Lutherans, well stated in the Creeds, and as you correctly state, the early councils. Your understanding of Luther is a bit muddled, which is understandable if you weren’t raised Lutheran (even some of us, too
), and haven’t studied him. As I have been recommended to read the CCC to understand Catholicism, I recommend you read the Lutheran Confessions. www.bookofconcord.orgJon
O
OneTrueCathApos
Guest
Please, everything I have said here is true. I am a Catholic by birth, through my whole life and will die one. Why would you not want to find out about your own Reformation, the man who started it all? Just as Jesus said “Do you despise me because I tell you the truth”?
O
OneTrueCathApos
Guest
I am sorry to disappoint you, but these are ALL Luther. Did it ever occur to you that you don’t have all your facts?Sola Fide - Luther, when understood properly
Sola Scriptura - Luther, when understood properly, not the oft mentioned “evangelical” approach, more correctly called solo scriptura. As a result, we use the creeds, have a confessional document, and accept at least the first six councils.
**
Predestination - Not Luther
**
Assurance of Salvation** - Not Luther
Total Depravity - Not sure where it came from first, but I know it is the “T” in Calvinism’s TULIP
The Catholic church is Apostate - for me to deny that Luther thought there were errors in at least Catholic practice of his time would be silly. I don’t know if Luther ever used the word apostate in this sense.
Any believer can correctly interpret Scripture - not Luther in the current understanding
**Ordained ministers (anyone can be ordained if they believe they are called) ** - not Luther
The church is a visible human institution (but not a unified institution) - I’ve never heard this, so I don’t know
The supreme importance of preaching - Not Luther. The preaching of the word is but one of the means of grace, as are the sacraments. The Sacrament of the Altar is the center of Lutheran worship, according to the confessions.
No, the core of all Christian teaching is, at least for Lutherans, well stated in the Creeds, and as you correctly state, the early councils. Your understanding of Luther is a bit muddled, which is understandable if you weren’t raised Lutheran (even some of us, too
Jon
N
notsmart
Guest
Sir, you are sadly mistaken. Luther NEVER taught predestination!
Do you want to villify Calvin perhaps?
By the way- Lutherans are rather picky about who can be ordained.
You lost every ounce of credibility with me.
J
jmcrae
Guest
No, most of what you have written about Protestantism is false, or way over-generalized. You are probably a very good Catholic, but you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Protestantism.
Please don’t try to wrap yourself in some kind of cloak of martyrdom; it just makes things worse.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Okay, you are talking to a Lutheran. If anybody would know what Lutheranism teaches, it would most likely be someone who goes to that church, right?
Come on, man. Give it up, already!
N
notsmart
Guest
You really don’t know about anglicans do you?
N
notsmart
Guest
You mean, a convert from Lutheran?
Okay, you are talking to a Lutheran. If anybody would know what Lutheranism teaches, it would most likely be someone who goes to that church, right?
Come on, man. Give it up, already!
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
More ignorant Luther-bashing - where would we be without it ?
The remarks of rather a lot of Catholics about the Jews have not been very nice - those of Chrysostom would not be out of place in the Volkischer Beobaechter & other NSDAP rags. 
As for burning Jewish books: Luther only advised it - the CC actually did it. Incinerating all things Jewish was not a lesson the CC needed to learn from him 
Luther’s remarks are those of a man affected by 700 years of anti-Jewish lies & hatred in German Catholicism. But at least he is not called Saint Luther - unlike Saint (!!!) Chrysostom, who had a start of 1100 years on him. If Luther is so dreadful, then of course he won’t say what’s admirable - that’s to be expected & is not a difficulty: the difficulty is in the vile slanders & hate of “Saint” Chrysostom. BTW - there is no such word as “repentful”. If nonsense pasted from web pages is not written in something at least resembling English, those who read English cannot be expected to understand it.
“Do penance”, “poenitentiam agite”, is not an adequate translation of the NT Greek. Metanoia is a change of mind, what in the OT is teshubhah, “turning again [to God]”. Penance can be done as an outward act, without implying any of the conversion the Biblical terms refer to: & Luther was sensitive to this. The Latin is an under-translation.
As to the question in the thread - the answer is: “No”. Taking a few passages from Luther & suggesting (or even insisting, despite correction) they are all that Protestantism amounts to, is no different from taking a few passages from St. Alphonsus & suggesting (or even insisting, despite correction) that they are all RCism amounts to.
- Status