Luther said he wanted to burn "all the Franciscan monks"!

[raumzeitmc2]

Elsewhere on this forum I was likened to Jack Chick for having simply reported the following historical fact:

In the year 1540, Luther said:

If I had all the Franciscan monks together in one house, I would set the house on fire. For the kernel is gone from the monks, only the chaff is still at hand. So into the fire with them!

• Tischreden i.e., Table Talk.

The Latin of the Table Talk reads:

Si ego omnes monachis Franciscanos haberem in unis aedibus, [ignem] subjicerem, ut Strocola, fecit mendicis.

In Luther and Lutherdom, Heinrich Denifle, p 381,
img191.imageshack.us/img191/3091/deniflepp3803810001.jpg

scribd.com/doc/16071007/Luther-and-Lutherdom-H-Denifle-Introduction-pp-128

Tischreden in der mathesischen Sammlung Aus einer Handschrift der Leipziger Stadtbibliothek, Martin Luther, Ernst Kroker, Johann Mathesius, No. 305, Franciscani incendiarii, p. 180.
books.google.com/books?id=mmYYAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22Tischreden+in+der+mathesischen+Sammlung%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=0#PPA180,M1

“Si ego omnes monachos Franciscanos haberem in unis”
books.google.com/books?hl=en&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images&q=%22Si%20ego%20omnes%20monachos%20Franciscanos%20haberem%20in%20unis%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wp

“Franciscanos haberem”
books.google.com/books?lr=&um=1&q=%22Franciscanos+haberem%22&btnG=Search+Books

I find it very unfortunate that some people apparently believe that the simple facts of history ought to be suppressed at all costs!

 

[Bill_Pick]

Lithern was a very sick man at the time of his death and he was afraird he had open a Paradora;s Box and any milkmaid that could read will start a new church,and he was right we now have over 35.oooo non=cathloic churchs

 

[SemperReformada]

I find it very unfortunate that some people apparently believe that the simple facts of history ought to be suppressed at all costs!

Out of curiosity, why not lament various Catholics (layman, priests, bishops, and popes) who were scoundrels?

 

[Eleve]

That Luther was a bigot is as well-known as it is irrelevant. When modern-day Protestants are taking his words as a directive to bring siege engines to Assisi, this will be a problem.

 

[SemperReformada]

That Luther was a bigot is as well-known as it is irrelevant. When modern-day Protestants are taking his words as a directive to bring siege engines to Assisi, this will be a problem.

Shhhh…don’t give away our plans.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Sounds like something an Augustinian would say.

Of course, Franciscans are not monks…

 

[scottywolf777]

Out of curiosity, why not lament various Catholics (layman, priests, bishops, and popes) who were scoundrels?

Luther WAS a Catholic scoundrel! We had the good sense to see him as one and excommunicate him! Too bad protestantism hadn’t had that good sense. Luther’s anti-semetic statements were regularly quoted by another ex-communicated scoundrel Hitler.

 

[Eleve]

Again irrelevant. Protestants respect Luther’s scholarship on theology. They generally do not respect his opinions on Jews.

By the way, do you have a source for the claim that Hitler was excommunicated?

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Again irrelevant.

Actually it is relevant. You asked why Catholics didn’t attack Catholic scoundrels, to which they replied that at the time Martin Luther was excommunicated he was still part of the Roman Catholic Church and therefore a Catholic scoundrel.

 

[SemperReformada]

Luther WAS a Catholic scoundrel! We had the good sense to see him as one and excommunicate him! Too bad protestantism hadn’t had that good sense. Luther’s anti-semetic statements were regularly quoted by another ex-communicated scoundrel Hitler.

I don’t believe there was every a public announcment of Hitler’s excommunication.

 

[SemperReformada]

Actually it is relevant. You asked why Catholics didn’t attack Catholic scoundrels, to which they replied that at the time Martin Luther was excommunicated he was still part of the Roman Catholic Church and therefore a Catholic scoundrel.

Actually I asked the question.

 

[Eleve]

It wasn’t me asking, but whatever. What is irrelevant is Luther’s anti-Semitism, or his anti-monasticism, or whatever species of genetic fallacy is going to crop up next. I think everyone on these boards understands that Catholics disagree with Luther and the resulting schism. Constantly restating this, especially by attacking a centuries-dead man personally, doesn’t contribute to any discussion or even communicate anything meaningful.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Actually I asked the question.

And Eleve said scottywolf777’s response was irrelevant. The antisemitic reference was an afterthought.

 

[scottywolf777]

I don’t believe there was every a public announcment of Hitler’s excommunication.

Hitler was de facto excommunicated by virtue of his renunciation of catholicism and embracing nazism with it’s Germanic paganism derived from Wagner. Pope Pious XII couldn’t formally pronounce excommunication because of fear or reprisals against Catholics in europe.
Greetings to yet another wolf.:byzsoc: Slava Jesus Christus

 

[dianaiad]

Luther WAS a Catholic scoundrel! We had the good sense to see him as one and excommunicate him! Too bad protestantism hadn’t had that good sense. Luther’s anti-semetic statements were regularly quoted by another ex-communicated scoundrel Hitler.

OK, this is the second fastest application of Godwin’s law I’ve seen on this forum. ('course, it’s really hard to beat having it occur in the OP…)

 

[Eleve]

And Eleve said scottywolf777’s response was irrelevant. The antisemitic reference was an afterthought.

I was in fact referring to the antisemitic reference. It didn’t occur to me to be more specific, because that last sentence was what stuck out at me in spite of not being the true focus of his/her post.

 

[SemperReformada]

OK, this is the second fastest application of Godwin’s law I’ve seen on this forum. ('course, it’s really hard to beat having it occur in the OP…)

With Luther it usually happens just about as fast.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

I was in fact referring to the antisemitic reference. It didn’t occur to me to be more specific, because that last sentence was what stuck out at me in spite of not being the true focus of his/her post.

Oops! Sorry. My mistake.

 

[Eleve]

No, mea culpa. Only a part of scottywolf’s post was irrelevant, and I forgot to specify.

On the other hand, I do think that his point about Luther’s Catholicism is rather oblique to Semper’s point that combatively bashing the other side’s leaders doesn’t help to discern truth.

 

[raumzeitmc2]

Out of curiosity, why not lament various Catholics (layman, priests, bishops, and popes) who were scoundrels?

Semper, I offer several responses.

1. For my part, I think I’ve been very forthright in pointing out certain failings and embarrassing actions on the part of Catholics.
   forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4035571&postcount=1
   forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4908299&postcount=1
2. Have you no scoundrels in your church?? And was it not Luther himself who was forced to acknowledge that his own doctrines were the “delight of debauchees?”

One thing I entreat you by the bowels of Christ (per viscera Christi), not readily to believe those who calumniate me. In regard to what you inform me, — that my doctrines are the delight of debauchees, and that many scandalous practices have been the consequence of my recent publications, I am neither afraid of such censorious representations nor surprised to hear of them.

Luther to Johann von Staupitz, June 27, 1522.
books.google.com/books?id=dEgI7lL3UhUC&pg=PA692&dq=%22my+doctrines+are+the+delight+of+debauchees%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=0&client=firefox

Latin:

Unum autem oro te per viscera Christi, ne facile credas delatoribus nostris, sive adversus Wenceslaum, sive erga me. Nam quod tu scribis, mea jactari ab iis, qui lupanaria colunt, et multa scandala ex recentiorilms scriptisimeis orta, neque miror neque metuo. Certe nos hic egimus et agimus, ut sine tumultu purum verbum publicemus apud homines, quo et boni et Maliutantur scis, quam non sit in nostra potestate…

Dr Martin Luther’s Briefe, Sendschreiben und Bedenken vollständig aus den verschiedenen Ausgaben…, W. M. L. De Wette, vol. 2, p. 215
books.google.com/books?id=sPoQAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA215&dq=%22+te+per+viscera+Christi%22+luther&lr=&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES

1. Regarding Catholic “scoundrels.” They have been lamented alright - mercilessly and ad nauseam - by Protestants for 500 years, even as they glorified their reformers and the reformation! And indeed, Protestants have, from the very beginning, treated Catholics, with great unfairness. Slander, it seems, was the weapon of choice.

It began, of course, in the sixteenth century, as William Thomas Walsh tells us, with the Lutheran preachers, who "prepared for the onslaught by laying down a barrage of foully abusive pamphlets and vilifying sermons.” (Philip II, , p. 118).
books.google.com/books?hl=en&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images&q=%22foully%20abusive%20pamphlets%20and%20vilifying%20sermons%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wp

And has continued even to this very day.

Here is a brief overview of the strategy:

George Orwell observed in 1949 that: “Who controls the past, controls the future”. But Luther had anticipated this observation four hundred years previously and, as early as 1536, was making history the servant of polemics. The new interest, which urged 16th century scholars to investigate the past, was not pure history, but fuelled by a hatred for the Church. It was this attitude of Luther that inspired the formation of a team of Protestant scholars directed by Flacius Illyricus (1520 – 1575). Based at Magdeburg, each researcher was allocated one century as his field of work so as to produce ‘The History of the Christian Church’. The team became known as: ‘The Centuriators of Magdeburg’.

The Centuriators combed history for scandals and calumnies designed to prove that the whole body of Catholics had always been the foulest of humans. This would befit a Church which Luther had proclaimed as: ‘‘The Whore of Babylon”. They specialized in misrepresentation and in mutilated and forged documents. Between 1559 and 1574, thirteen volumes of the history were published. The story of a ‘Pope Joan’ was typical of its output, and the alleged finding of 6000 heads of children in a convent fishpond so as to explain why convents were built close to large lakes and swamps. The stories were propagated in foul language, which probably aided rather than hindered their circulation.

A Brief History of No-Popery
churchinhistory.org/pages/leaflets/no-popery.htm

Yet for all that, there have been a number of Protestant historians - good and honorable men - who have seen the wrongfulness of the situation and have spoken out. For example:

Dean Stanley in his, Life and Letters (vol. I, p. 151) writes:

“I am convinced that Protestantism in general treats Catholics with shameful ignorance and unfairness.”
books.google.com/books?id=degWAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA157&dq=%22treats+Catholics+with+shameful+ignorance%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=0&client=firefox

You can find a number of other well documented examples here.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4080237&postcount=6

I sincerely hope this helps.

God bless.