Luther Did Not Start the Reformation

[Gorgias]

I think the pope provided the cutting tools

To be fair, there were plenty of competing political, religious, and financial forces in play. Luther was just the one (among many) who, putting spark to tinder, managed to get a wildfire started.

And, I think, the question of whether Luther “started a church” is the wrong way to put it. Did he set in motion a movement which the “national church” proponents used to get their pet project off the ground? Certainly. Did this kick off with the secular affirmation of the effect of the excommunications (of Luther and his followers) at the Diet of Worms? Ostensibly. Does the fact that Luther went into hiding mean that he wasn’t the founder of this competing church?

I would say no – despite the fact that he went into hiding (quite naturally, given the results of the Diet), his refusal to accept the will of the Church can be seen as nothing short of accepting that he (and his followers) would begin their own tradition, outside of the Church. There is no other reasonable interpretation of what he expected the result to be at that point, is there?

Moreover, the fact that he spent his time at Wartburg penning increasingly vitriolic essays against the Church demonstrates his support of the break that he initiated. And, finally, his first public act upon reappearing in Wittenberg is to preach.

C’mon, now… is there any doubt that his actions founded a new ecclesial community? Is there any doubt that he supported this new community from its inception?

 

[AugustTherese]

Lutherans believe that the true Gospel existed then and still exists now within the RCC, even though Lutherans believe it is somewhat obscured by extraneous teachings

The ‘true Gospel’ that ‘is somewhat obscured by extraneous teachings’?

 

[AugustTherese]

Except that he didn’t. I like EWTN, but they obviously have a bias. Read Luther’s own explanation. Then look at English language Bibles, and notice that alone is not in Romans 3:28. Why? Because English is not German, and German is not Latin or Greek.

Translation is not transliteration.

“So halten wir nun dafür, daß der Mensch gerecht werde ohne des Gesetzes Werke, allein durch den Glauben”. Romans 3:28 LUTH 1545

@JonNC, could you kindly translate the German word ‘allein’ into English for me? Thanks!

 

[JonNC]

Charity is to DO what Jesus willed. “Whoever then who doesn’t do that” as the paragraph states, commits an offense against charity.

And I would say that anyone, anyone!, who makes the claim that their salvation is based on membership in any one institutional church is uncharitable. Christ makes no such command.

That’s not to say certain errors can’t be dangerous. They can. But that is not the same as claiming that a particular institutional membership, in and of itself, impacts the possibility of salvation

 

[AugustTherese]

who makes the claim that their salvation is based on membership in any one institutional church is uncharitable.

Then, what is the point of a Church?

That’s not to say certain errors can’t be dangerous. They can. But that is not the same as claiming that a particular institutional membership, in and of itself, impacts the possibility of salvation

Dangerous how, if not to one’s salvation?

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Charity is to DO what Jesus willed. “Whoever then who doesn’t do that” as the paragraph states, commits an offense against charity.

And I would say that anyone, anyone!, who makes the claim that their salvation is based on membership in any one institutional church is uncharitable. Christ makes no such command.

On the contrary
The statement was

"Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved".

I’ve given plenty of times where “Scripture and Tradition” teach that. So it is NOT just anyone saying it. It is from Scripture, meaning it’s from Jesus, and Tradition, (His Church that He established).

If you want me to post the evidence again I will.

JonNC:

That’s not to say certain errors can’t be dangerous. They can. But that is not the same as claiming that a particular institutional membership, in and of itself, impacts the possibility of salvation

As Lumen Gentium points to, as well as scripture,
Once someone knows the truth and won’t follow it, then bad consequences follow that person. That’s scriptural teaching, and it’s followed up with the same teaching in Tradition.

Again, if you want me to post the evidence again from Scripture & Tradition, I’ll be happy to do it.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Agreed. These forces were well underway all over Europe for up to a century or more before Luther was born. Germany was a hotbed of discontent, especially Northern Germany as I recall, though various Church policies and practices were alienating many regions back to the Middle Ages, Holy Roman Empire. Luther possessed an originality, a fervor (both good and bad) an authenticity, though, that I think did help history along in this regard. No one else could have had the impact he did at that point in time. Not the work of Calvin, Zwingli, John Knox, etc. I don’t think the RCC at the time was really equipped to deal with him - he was a genius in many ways, for better or worse. Like a runaway horse inadequately kept, tended. Catholic institutional corruption, weakness, disorientation all played into the Reformation’s hands. They underestimated, misunderstood the intensity and integrity of faith of many Reformers, though I admit much of it was secular-driven. It is a serious miscalculation to dismiss it all that way though.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Except that he didn’t. I like EWTN, but they obviously have a bias. Read Luther’s own explanation. Then look at English language Bibles, and notice that alone is not in Romans 3:28. Why? Because English is not German, and German is not Latin or Greek.

Translation is not transliteration.

“So halten wir nun dafür, daß der Mensch gerecht werde ohne des Gesetzes Werke, allein durch den Glauben”. Romans 3:28 LUTH 1545

@JonNC, could you kindly translate the German word ‘allein’ into English for me? Thanks!

And that’s the point. It isn’t used in the English, in any translation I know of. Why? Because unlike inthe German , it is not necessary in the English.
If this was a “change” the wording thing, every English Bible would have alone in Romans 3:28

 

[JonNC]

Then, what is the point of a Church?

To preach the word and administer the sacraments.

Dangerous how, if not to one’s salvation?

Dangerous to one’s salvation, but that has little to do with MEMBERSHIP

 

[JonNC]

Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved".

And that is uncharitable. It is no different than those who say Catholics cannot be saved.

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

@JonNC,@steve-b

It’s kind of odd, because I am sort of between both of you on this. This is from the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 25, http://epcoga.wpengine.com/wp-conte...-We-Are/B-About-The-EPC/WCF-ModernEnglish.pdf

> Chapter 25

The Church

1. The catholic or universal church is invisible and consists of all the elect who have been, are, or
   ever will be gathered into one under Christ, the head. The church is his body and spouse, the
   fullness of God, who fills all in all.
2. The visible church is also catholic or universal under the gospel, i.e., it is not confined to one
   nation as previously under the Mosaic Law. It consists of everyone in the world who professes
   the true religion together with their children. The visible church is the kingdom of the Lord
   Jesus Christ and the house and family of God, outside of which people cannot ordinarily be
   **> saved.
3. In order to gather and perfect the saints in this life until the end of the world Christ has given
   the ministry, Scriptures, and ordinances of God to this universal visible church, and by his own
   presence and Spirit he enables the church to function in this way according to his promise.
   This universal church has been sometimes more and sometimes less visible. Particular
   churches, which are members of it, are also more or less pure, depending on how the gospel is
   accepted and taught, how the ordinances of God are administered, and how public worship is
   performed.
4. The purest churches under heaven are subject both to impurity and error. Some churches have
   so degenerated that they are not churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan. Nevertheless,
   there will always be a church on earth to worship God according to his will.
5. There is no other head of the church than the Lord Jesus Christ.

This outlines our belief in the difference between the visible and the invisible church, as well as making the statement I bolded. The word ‘ordinarily’ should be stressed in this discussion.

We agree that membership in the catholic (lower case) church is ordinarily needed, but we reject the idea that the Catholic Church is really Catholic - there are so many Christians outside it that the title is at best inaccurate.

We have had discussions on ‘no salvation is possible outside the Catholic church before.’ I would rather this thread not be turned into one.

And I don’t think one sentence in all of Vatican 2 documents should be so blown out of proportion as to ignore every other thing said then or since, which seems to be happening. It may be your personal interpretation to so emphasize this, @steve-b, but it is a delusion to think that the Catholic Church shares this interpretation. Likewise with the pulling of quotes out of context to support your position.

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

steve-b:

Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved".

And that is uncharitable. It is no different than those who say Catholics cannot be saved.

It’s kind of a Catch-22. If you believe the Catholic Church is true in all it says it is, you should enter it. Otherwise, not a problem. So I don’t see it as uncharitable, although some present it that way.

MANY Protestants reject the Catholic Church and all its claims, seeing as with the CC it seems to be an all or nothing deal. To be Catholic you have to assent to ALL it teaches (despite the poor example so often seen on CAF). I reject this sentence, so it does not apply to me. No worries!

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

Once someone knows the truth and won’t follow it, then bad consequences follow that person. That’s scriptural teaching, and it’s followed up with the same teaching in Tradition.

Again, if you want me to post the evidence again from Scripture & Tradition, I’ll be happy to do it.

I think you need to read that over slowly and consider how it applies to you.

 

[Gorgias]

It’s kind of a Catch-22. If you believe the Catholic Church is true in all it says it is, you should enter it. Otherwise, not a problem. So I don’t see it as uncharitable, although some present it that way.

In fact, it’s the exact opposite of a Catch-22 …!

Whereas the notion of a Catch-22 is that one knows what he should do, but is forced to be incapable of actualizing it, this statement asserts that those who know what they should do really can and must actualize it!

(And, looking at the converse of the statement, “those can be saved who do not know that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ”!)

In other words, salvation is found

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

SojournerOnEarth:

It’s kind of a Catch-22. If you believe the Catholic Church is true in all it says it is, you should enter it. Otherwise, not a problem. So I don’t see it as uncharitable, although some present it that way.

In fact, it’s the exact opposite of a Catch-22 …!

Whereas the notion of a Catch-22 is that one knows what he should do, but is forced to be incapable of actualizing it, this statement asserts that those who know what they should do really can and must actualize it!

(And, looking at the converse of the statement, “those can be saved who do not know that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ”!)

In other words, salvation is found

You should do what you know you should do. Yep. You don’t have to do what you don’t know you should do. So I view this sentence as a lot milder than it is viewed in the delusions of some.

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

Can we get back to blaming everyone but Luther for starting the Reformation?

Thank you.

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

We have seen that Luther was one of a number of people working towards Reformation, some of whom stayed Catholic and others split. I see the Reformation as an event in which he was one player; the Reformation started centuries before he was born and ended after he was dead.

He had a prominent role, I will agree. The myth is ‘once upon a time Europe was happy and united. Then came Martin Luther and it all fell apart.’ This is a dangerous oversimplification. The counter myth is that God sent a new Savior, Martin Luther, to lead Christians into a glorious new paradise.

We need to stop being intoxicated by our own myths. We gotta work towards fixing this thing.

 

[AugustTherese]

To preach the word and administer the sacraments.

And, yet we have thousands upon thousands of different denominations with a different ‘word’ and illicit and/or invalid sacraments; heck, some do not even have sacraments. But, as long as you confess the Nicene Creed where two or three gather together, no problem?

Dangerous to one’s salvation, but that has little to do with MEMBERSHIP

Is it not possible to have ‘membership’ to a ‘church’ who promulgates error? Being a member of the LDS is not dangerous to one’s salvation?

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

JonNC:

To preach the word and administer the sacraments.

And, yet we have thousands upon thousands of different denominations with a different ‘word’ and illicit and/or invalid sacraments; heck, some do not even have sacraments. But, as long as you confess the Nicene Creed where two or three gather together, no problem?

Dangerous to one’s salvation, but that has little to do with MEMBERSHIP

Is it not possible to have ‘membership’ to a ‘church’ who promulgates error? Being a member of the LDS is not dangerous to one’s salvation?

Non-sequitors.

 

[SojournerOnEarth]

Your last paragraph is just bias.

I finally found this post. Which paragraph did you have in mind, if you recall?