Luther-Bashing is Anti-Catholic

  • Thread starter Thread starter SojournerOnEarth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And the encompassing language should not be disregarded in considering isolated sentences, correct?

Did you miss my earlier question about submission to the Church?
 
40.png
JonNC:
40.png
steve-b:
Most of my responses are backed up by Church links, NOT my opinions but Church links. NONE of them are squishy on the subject matter.
Links from which part of His true Church?
That’s the point, and it may be unresolvable between us.
I guess my question is what part of the Catholic practice of ecumenism is squishy and who is to blame ?
I assume you missed some of my earlier posts. @steve-b, are you in complete Catholic submission to the current Pope, and the Magisterium, in everything, and in particular to its ecumenical efforts?
I follow this approach http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...th_doc_20071203_nota-evangelizzazione_en.html

I give information properly referenced, when I’m addressing a topic. What someone does with it is their business.
 
Why has @Steido01 been banned? He seemed like he was a polite and well mannered fellow
 
Last edited:
40.png
steve-b:
A valid excommunication cannot be lifted posthumously.
Good point. Nor can the fact he was declared a heretic as well
Source, please?

And the pope could overturn either, I suppose.
[/quote]

Source of Luther being declared a heretic? Exsurge Domine - Papal Encyclicals

From that encyclical on Luther

(emphasis mine)

“Therefore we can, without any further citation or delay, proceed against him to his condemnation and damnation as one whose faith is notoriously suspect and in fact a true heretic with the full severity of each and all of the above penalties and censures.”

As far as I know, A pope can’t overturn that once a person is dead.
 
Last edited:
It’s really sad to see this. I could say why… but maybe I shouldn’t…
 
We shouldn’t slander anyone, including Luther. But we also shouldn’t engage in a false irenicism–a common temptation in ecumenism, but condemned by Vatican II in its decree on the subject. Unfortunately, I think a lot of well-meaning churchmen can get a little carried away in their ecumenical endeavors. If we can criticize the churchmen of Luther’s time for their excesses, we can do the same for the churchmen of our time.

I honestly don’t see how Luther can be a “witness to the Gospel” unless we give the word “Gospel” a broader, vaguer meaning. He himself said he taught a different Gospel from the Catholic Church (he of course thought his was the right one).

In any event, Luther’s character or what his definitive doctrine actually was (which is hard to pin down anyway depending on when he is writing) is not a truth revealed by God or one to be definitively held and is therefore not something that threatens ecclesiastical communion if there is disagreement about it. The fact is, however, in his own time he was judged a heretic by the Church and he didn’t say he was misread.
 
Last edited:
It should also be noted, excessive or one-sided Luther praising can also be harmful to unity since it gives justification to a “sin of separation”–in this case heresy. Just as we shouldn’t paper over the sins of Catholic clergy at the time, we shouldn’t paper over the guilt of those like Luther who committed the actual sin of separation which broke unity in the first place. Overlooking or justifying the sins that break unity is just a recipe for further disunity. Rather, these sins should be treated with the gravity that the saints have always treated them.
 
Presenting actual words written by Martin Luther in itself is not “bashing”—because they were true. Note again that Martin Luther never recanted any of his words regarding what he said about Jews; although he did have his chances. Luther wrote “Jesus was born a Jew” in 1523; where he requested his followers to treat Jews “gently”, while calling the pope and catholic bishops “fools”. But 20 years later in 1543, Luther wrote “On the Jews and their lies”. This was where he replaced the gentle treatment toward the Jews with ferocious hatred and bigotry—hardly humane as you claimed. To be more specific, Luther wrote:

—to burn down Jewish synagogues and schools and warn people against them;
—to refuse to let Jews own houses among Christians;
for Jewish religious writings to be taken away;
for rabbis to be forbidden to preach;
—to offer no protection to Jews on highways;
for usury to be prohibited and for all silver and gold to be removed, put aside for safekeeping, and given back to Jews who truly convert; and
—to give young, strong Jews flail, axe, spade, and spindle, and let them earn.

Martin Luther was a Catholic priest and an established theologian. Of course, he had good points to say about theology. In fact, the Catholic Church agrees there are good things in Luther writing regarding justification. I refer you to the document “From conflict to communion” for further details.

As for other aspects of Catholic theology and the Catholic Church in general, Luther’s rejection of the papacy, the Holy Orders and validity of the Eucharist as the real presence of Christ can not be ignored. Further, at the beginning, Luther was absolutely correct in pointing out the abuses in the Church. But it was clear later that Luther wanted to leave the Catholic Church and established his own church. The resulted Protestant Reformation was a disaster for Christianity.
 
Last edited:
Like anything, there is good to Luther and bad to him.

He did much harm to the unity of the Church. He said some bad things. He had some false doctrine.

He had some good criticisms too. And his followers shouldn’t be blamed for his sins or errors.
 
you will see Luther-bashing repeatedly done, as if there is some moment in the Mass where you have a Two-Minute Hate or there is a private devotion of We Hate Martin Luther.
Really? Examples? I doubt that most Catholics today could even tell you who Luther was.
 
Well, I’m sorry. But I don’t like Martin Luther. Have no respect for him. Any negative views about him people have are well deserved. The breach between Catholics and Lutherans can’t and won’t be fully repaired. Too much hurt and anger even after all these years.

The only ones I’ve ever noticed not liking Martin Luther to be bashed are Protestants.
 
Still something was done “wrong”. Considering this entire thread and all the posts it should cause some confusion!
 
We do. We’ve been doing it for 500 years. The Reformed tried to hijack Luther for their own purposes.
Thank you, I do appreciate it. But I was referring to the Evangelicals that do it on this forum and I’ve never had a Lutheran back me up when I show them what Luther actually said.

I have read some of the book of Concord. Just not enough time in the day to give it a thorough read, I’m about 6 books behind on my stocking stuffers from Christmas and they take priority.
Roman Catholics will be surprised to see more disagreement with Evangelicals than Rome.
Not at all I believe you. Most of the Evangelicals I have spoken with pretty much agree with 1 or 2 things Luther taught and about 100 things they think he taught.

God Bless
 
40.png
steve-b:
Most of my responses are backed up by Church links, NOT my opinions but Church links. NONE of them are squishy on the subject matter.
Links from which part of His true Church?
That’s the point, and it may be unresolvable between us.
There’s only one true Church, and it is the one that is in perfect union with the chair of Peter. There is only one chair of Peter. That is the pope of Rome.
40.png
JonNC:
I guess my question is what part of the Catholic practice of ecumenism is squishy and who is to blame ?
Those who are squishy are those that don’t follow the main purpose of ecumenism in the first place. To lead all the separated to, or back to, the Catholic Church.

Said another way, back on post 109 Luther-Bashing is Anti-Catholic - #109 by steve-b
 
Last edited:
Those who are squishy are those that don’t follow the main purpose of ecumenism in the first place. To lead all the separated to, or back to, the Catholic Church.
Do you think the leaders in the Catholic aren’t doing that? Do you think Cardinal Kasper and Pope Francis are squishy? Was Pope Benedict?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top