Luther and the contemporary Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul1998
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Paul1998

Guest
Hi. So i read a book about Martin Luther and to be honest i really like that guy. I mean yes, I understand that sola scriptura and other protestant doctrines are logically fallacious or at least wrong, but let’s be honest, Catholicism in those days was horrible. So Luther was right with many things and that’s a thing you can’t deny. I have three questions about this matter:
  1. do you think that Luther was right to start a reformation back then (because yeah, i know he shouldn’t separate from the church, but it was the best thing to do because the catholic church was suppressing the pople)?
  2. Do you think that his theology was less about doctrine and more about protecting the people?
  3. How much of his doctrine corresponds with today’s catholicism?
 
Last edited:
I think the reformation would have taken place regardless.

There were many who were discontented with the Church at the time (Thomas More among them) and Luther’s actions were a convenient excuse to start a radical move.

He had some very valid concerns.
 
Paul1998 said:
I mean yes, I understand that sola scriptura and other protestant doctrines are logically fallacious or at least wrong, but let’s be honest, Catholicism in those days was horrible
Click to expand...
I was going to say this thread will degenerate into polemics in about three posts, but this in the OP already qualifies.

That’s said,
Paul1998 said:
do you think that Luther was right to start a reformation back then (because yeah, i know he shouldn’t separate from the church, but it was the best thing to do because the catholic church was suppressing the pople)?
Click to expand...
Ironically, no I do not think Luther was right
Nor do I think he was wrong. I just think he happened to be a particular person at a particular time that lent itself to the events that occurred. He was neither a villain nor a hero
Paul1998 said:
Do you think that his theology was less about doctrine and more about protecting the people?
Click to expand...
No. I think his theology was all about doctrine
Paul1998 said:
How much of his doctrine corresponds with today’s catholicism?
Click to expand...
Much of it, much more so than most non-Catholic western communions other than perhaps traditional Anglicanism.
 
No, i don’t want to talk about protestant dogmas, we accept them as wrong from the beginning. The problem is whether in that day and age was legitimate to start the reformation.
 
JonNC said:
No. I think his theology was all about doctrine
Click to expand...
I always saw it as sound doctrine would protect people. It wasn’t an either/or situation. I think Luther mentioned how indulgences were giving some unrepentant sinners false hopes of salvation in the 95 Theses.
 
Last edited:
No because the reformation should have been started by the bishops, not an angry monk.
 
But they didn’t and who knows when they stared the reformation if it wasn’t for Luther (i am talking about the counter reformation)
 
Only the bishops can reform the church though, that’s why Luther’s reformation was not actually a reformation, but a revolution/revolt, and started a new church.
 
Last edited:
Paul1998 said:
Why do you say this?
Click to expand...
Because only God can forgive sins and a true Christian would undergo sanctification and would be orientate himself in follow what God revealed. For Luther, if a sinner just bought an indulgence and then sinned again and again happily because he thinks he can purchase more in the future, that’s not true repentance.
  1. And so let them set their trust on entering heaven through many tribulations rather than some false security and peace.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Luther was dead wrong on many thing, but he probably started out with good intentions. Who published the book you were reading?
 
I don’t think Luther was trying to reform the Church. He used valid concerns and problems that were plaguing the Church at the time, as a jumping off point for his revolt and desire to change doctrine to fit his ideals and agendas.

Basically, it would be similar today, if a homosexual priest, decided to speak out against the Church for their corruption and at the same time lumped in the Church’s, out of touch views towards the LGBTQ community. For which he felt the need to change church teaching to confirm to his own views on homosexuality.

He might be looked at as true reformer for speaking out against corruption and wanting to change doctrine regarding homosexuality, but in the end his views were contrary to the truth, so it’s difficult to find merit in their protest.
 
Oxford University Press.
I know how to be selective on sources, it was 100% unbiased.
 
Paul1998 said:
Oxford University Press.
I know how to be selective on sources, it was 100% unbiased.
Click to expand...
Nothing is 100% bias-free. But even biased sources can provide key information or detail and are good sources if approached properly.
 
Last edited:
Hmm it’s an interesting point, but don’t forget the role he had even for the contemporary Catholic Church. He shaped it in some way.
 
I know, i was exaggerating a bit. But i do research in philosophy at my university, and everyone is using citations from Cambridge, Oxford etc. Their books are reliable sources.
 
Last edited:
Paul1998 said:
  • do you think that Luther was right to start a reformation back then (because yeah, i know he shouldn’t separate from the church, but it was the best thing to do because the catholic church was suppressing the pople)?
  • Do you think that his theology was less about doctrine and more about protecting the people?
  • How much of his doctrine corresponds with today’s catholicism?
Click to expand...
  1. Luther was wrong to start the reformation , esp the way he did. NOTE: he was NOT the only person calling for renewal in the Church. There were a number of Catholic Saints during the time in Spain working to renew the Church (the right way).
  1. No, his theology was totally about doctrine. He might have started out about wanting to protect the people, but by the end he totally trashed 1500 years of Church teaching and sacramental theology. Let’s also keep in mind that he suffered from scrupulosity. He had a very hard time dealing with church teachings
  1. A vast majority of his doctrine does correspond to with today’s DISSENT Catholics, Catholics who want us to be more Lutheran than Catholic.
 
Last edited:
No he absolutely did not do the right thing. He wasn’t protecting anyone but himself. The Church was not suppressing the people and the Church does not follow protestant theology though many Catholics try to make it look that way. That is mostly due to poor catechesis.
 
The true reformers were Saint Ignatius and the Jesuits, Saint Therese of Ávila and Saint John of the Cross with their discalced Carmelites, and the list could go on and on.
Luther was just a trouble maker, like most of the other “reformers”, thinking that they knew the faith better than the Church.

And the Church wasn’t supressing the people.
This is a protestant/modern view of the period prior to the so called reform, specially the Middle Ages, a period that used to be admired and loved by Catholics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top