Hi Spina,
Thanks for your response.
Hi Topper: It just seems to me that Luther was very much set in his ways. he appears to a very strong willed person with a rather large ego. it is true that Luther was not the only reformer as there were others before and during and afterwards. it also seems that Luther’s growing up in a rather harsh home and then being in a religious order that was also somewhat harsh appears to have formed him in how his thinking grew over time.
There does seem that Luther’s theology was influenced in large part by his scrupulosity he experienced and the struggle to overcome it. There was also the political influence from the princes of the time who used Luther to their own ends in weakening whatever power they thought the CC had over them. Without those princes who helped him I wonder if Luther would have succeeded.
When others like Calvin and Zwingli who had differing opinion and theology from Luther’s he attacked them in the same manor as he did the CC. While it is true that in the beginning Luther may have very well wanted just to reform the CC of abuses, in the end it seems that the more the CC disagreed and rejected Luther’s theology, the more Luther revolted and the more stubborn he became. Luther it seems was not going to recant nor concede anything, believing he was correct and the CC was wrong. The more Luther was attacked concerning his theology and interpretations of Scripture by the CC, the more vicious he became in his attacks against the CC and anyone else who disagreed with him.
I think that main reason as to why Luther was so successful was due to his having his tracts printed and published in German, more so than anyone else. In the end Luther breaking away from the teachings of the CC, and implementing his own interpretations of Scripture and his theology led to others breaking away and forming their own theology and interpretations which we see over the span of time develop into denominations each with their own interpretations of Scripture and theologies, which I think Luther would not have approved and would have argued as he did in his own time against any interpretation or theology that is different from his.
Boy do I wish I had your ability to be concise and explain the facts in a brief manner. I agree with all that you have said.
The question before us has to do with Luther’s motives, but it also has to do with whether he was being purposeful. In other words, did he really know what he was doing?
In fact, history suggests that he really wasn’t all that aware of ‘where’ he was going and what the ramifications would be.
As we all know, Luther redefined the concept of the ‘Church’. The question then becomes:
How well thought out was this redefinition?
James Kittleson a Lutheran Professor of Church History at the Luther Seminary, St. Paull, MN states:
**“Indeed, it is at least arguable that, save for one early disputation, which he mentioned in his memoir but which has been lost, he did not even think about the church as such until he was forced to it in 1519 by the impending debate with Johannes Eck at Leipzig. **Then he wrote a friend that he had been studying the history of the church and commented, ‘I whisper this in your ear,
I cannot decide whether the pope is the Antichrist or merely one of his chief henchmen, so violently does he deny Christ in his decretals and canons.” Kittleson, “Luther and Modern Church History”, pg. 262
What we learn here, is that at this point, Luther was almost a year and a half into his Revolt against the Church, and then, FINALLY, he decides to study the history of the Church, and, finally he gives some thought to the nature of the Church. Of course, being already this deep into his battle with the Church, and already referring to the Pope as the Antichrist, it only makes sense that he was going to conclude that the Church was not what it claimed to be.
God Bless You Spina, Topper
