LUTHER: The 2003 film with Joseph Fiennes

[TertiumQuid]

Eden:

A little humility and a lot less pride will do you well. While I understand that your pride is wounded because we have rejected your “feature article” on an anti-Catholic website, I would like to remind you that you are a guest among Catholics. If you came to this site with the attitude that *you *had something to tell *us *to set us straight, you will be sorely disappointed.

Well, i knew it would eventually happen- this thread has reached the point in which no discussion is actually happening.

Eden:

Surely, after your time as moderator on the Catholic boards at CARM, you have learned something about respectful dialogue.

Were these comments personally directred towards me respectful?:

Originally Posted by EDEN
For all Catholics, it is important that we not become victims of revisionist history about the heresy that was Martin Luther.

Originally Posted by EDEN
Apologist work for Luther is abetting the Devil.

Originally Posted by EDEN
Luther’s corrupt philosophy can be explained away in mellifluous language, abundant Scripture quotations and blithe dismissal but its sounds ring from a dark source.

Eden:

Might I remind you that your condescending attitude about my “education” reflects your own insecurity.

Not sure where I commented on your “education”- other than exhorting you to do a little better research.

Eden:

Your opinion of Luther is very high, however, it is just your opinion. You have made it quite clear that no understanding of Luther is the “correct” understanding unless one reaches the same conclusions that you have.

No. There are people who hold differing conclusions about different aspects of Luther. I have a high level of respect for many good Roman Catholic scholars, but would disagree with them on various conclusions. However, the key is to present *solid evidence * for one’s conclusion.

Eden:

I find your research on Luther to be fawning and misleading (especially your references to Desiderius Erasmus and Cardinal Cajetan).

This is what i’m talking about. Saying something is “x” is not proving that it is “x”. You must prove that I have mistreated Cajetan and Erasmus. As an aside, I do have a historical correction to make in regard to my treatment of Erasmus. This will be corrected this summer.

Eden:

It’s rather a pity that you will not open yourself to learning anything from* us*.

Well, so far, I haven’t gleaned any insight into Luther, other than the quote “sin boldly” will be utilized by Roman Catholics who won’t read a context or do a little better research. I’m sorry Eden.

I appreciate your zeal and passion for your church. It is commendable. But, some of your methods of researching Luther are not the best. I understand many Catholics think negatively of Luther. However, certain arguments against him are flawed (like the “sin boldly” one). You should stick with your arguments on authority. There, you were getting at some real issues. If I haven’t been banned from here (not sure why this would happen), and, if you can tone it down a little, I would be interested in discussing this with you once my semester ends.

Regards,
James Swan

 

[TertiumQuid]

Mickey:

Do you know how fast we would be suspended if we were on a protestant forum writing similar comments that James posts here? In the blink of an eye!

Hi Mickey,

While i know you don’t want to discuss Luther (though you’re posting in this thread anyway), maybe you can be of help to me.
Can you show me whom I have directly insulted or maligned?

The key here, is which specific person have I attacked unjustly, and attacked personally?

I also can get passionate about my subject and write things I shouldn’t. If you can show me whom I have been mean to, I will apologize to the offended party.

BTW, the majority of people I moderated and warned on the CARM catholic board were protestant. Since they were protestant, and Catholics were the “guests”, I scrutinized Protestant posters very carefully.

James Swan

 

[TertiumQuid]

Mickey:

In order for me to refute your conclusions on Martin Luther, I would have to dedicate an inordinate amount of time researching and studying this man. My time is devoted to reading the Word of God, reflecting on the teachings of the Catholic/Orthodox Church, and studying the writings of the Church fathers. Personally, for me to study and analyze Martin Luther, (or any other reformer for that matter), would be a fruitless endeavor.

Ok. Suppose there was a different thread, and you were spending a lot of time providing information about the history and signifacance of a particular church father, let’s pick Athansius.

And then I came along and said, “Honestly Mickey, I don’t give a whole lot of thought to Athansius. I’m the last one to enter into an in-depth analysis of Athanasius. The deepest wells have the clearest water. I’m not a psycho-analyst but it seems that you are obsessed with Athanasius. Hey, we all have our hobbies.”

You are correct in this: in order to refute anybody on anything, it takes time and work to research and know your subject. I think its best to either do the work needed to make your conclusions, or simply lurk in the background, without commenting on whether or not someone is “obsessed”. Saying someone is “obsessed” who simply has done the work necessary to support their conclusions is, well, not really a nice thing to say.

Take Care,
James Swan

 

[Mickey]

TertiumQuid:

You are correct in this: in order to refute anybody on anything, it takes time and work to research and know your subject. I think its best to either do the work needed to make your conclusions, or simply lurk in the background, without commenting on whether or not someone is “obsessed”. Saying someone is “obsessed” who simply has done the work necessary to support their conclusions is, well, not really a nice thing to say.

Take Care,
James Swan

Are you calling me a lurker! :bigyikes:
You are correct James. I apologize. And since I have not much to say about Luther, (and this is a Luther thread), I shall bow out of the dialogue. However, I will leave you with this:

The sole purpose of our exisitence on this planet is to worship and glorify God. This can be done through marriage, your children, various talents (gifts), our jobs, and of course prayer and Church services. The study of Scripture, Church teachings, and writings of Holy and great saints such as Athanasius, assists me on my journey toward a deeper relationship with God. If the extensive study, research, and analysis, of Martin Luther, is for the worship and glory of God, then may the peace of the Lord assist you on your journey. However, if it is for the sole reason of proving others wrong who don’t agree with your conclusions through chatroom debates, it may be possible that pride and ego have entered the equation. (I’m not saying that is the case with you). Again, I apologize if I have offended you. My zeal gets skewed in these darn forums sometimes. Take care James.

God Bless you,
Mickey

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_3_15.gif

 

[Eden]

Mickey:

Are you calling me a lurker! :bigyikes:
You are correct James. I apologize. And since I have not much to say about Luther, (and this is a Luther thread), I shall bow out of the dialogue. However, I will leave you with this:

The sole purpose of our exisitence on this planet is to worship and glorify God. This can be done through marriage, your children, various talents (gifts), our jobs, and of course prayer and Church services. The study of Scripture, Church teachings, and writings of Holy and great saints such as Athanasius, assists me on my journey toward a deeper relationship with God. If the extensive study, research, and analysis, of Martin Luther, is for the worship and glory of God, then may the peace of the Lord assist you on your journey. However, if it is for the sole reason of proving others wrong who don’t agree with your conclusions through chatroom debates, it may be possible that pride and ego have entered the equation. (I’m not saying that is the case with you). Again, I apologize if I have offended you. My zeal gets skewed in these darn forums sometimes. Take care James.

God Bless you,
Mickey

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_3_15.gif

Mickey, you were involved at some point because Tertium Quid has identified himself as an admirer of Svendsen and Engwer. Both men have committed time and energy to undermining the Catholic faith and confusing Catholics as to the truth of our faith.
One doesn’t need an “education” on Luther to know that these “discussions” come from an organized anti-Catholilc effort. You were completely just in involving yourself. Don’t let your important contributions to this thread become a victim of “revisionist” history as well! Pray for all of those who undermine our faith!

 

[Eden]

TertiumQuid:

Well, i knew it would eventually happen- this thread has reached the point in which no discussion is actually happening. - **This is actually the most important discussion that we’ve had so far. **

Were these comments personally directred towards me respectful?:

Originally Posted by EDEN
For all Catholics, it is important that we not become victims of revisionist history about the heresy that was Martin Luther.

Originally Posted by EDEN
Apologist work for Luther is abetting the Devil.

Originally Posted by EDEN
Luther’s corrupt philosophy can be explained away in mellifluous language, abundant Scripture quotations and blithe dismissal but its sounds ring from a dark source. **- I was directing my response at Catholics while describing *any ***anti-Catholic work on Luther. It was not the will of the Holy Spirit to break apart his Church. Luther worked on his own for that one. Yes. I can personally only conclude that if the Holy Spirit was not guiding Luther who was? The Holy Spirit was not the one who would benefit from Christians being apart. I’m sorry to be so blunt.

Not sure where I commented on your “education”- other than exhorting you to do a little better research.** - You were referring to my “Luther education”.**

No. There are people who hold differing conclusions about different aspects of Luther. I have a high level of respect for many good Roman Catholic scholars, but would disagree with them on various conclusions. However, the key is to present *solid evidence *for one’s conclusion. - **It would be refreshing to see some criticism of Luther in your work. He was not a perfect man, nor are any of us. Your work becomes biased and can not be taken seriously by any true scholar- Catholic or Protestant because of this. While your opinion of him is much higher than my own it would lend more credibility to your research if you can concede some flaws. Your work, like the movie, becomes less about research and more about propaganda when that balance is lost. **

This is what i’m talking about. Saying something is “x” is not proving that it is “x”. You must prove that I have mistreated Cajetan and Erasmus. As an aside, I do have a historical correction to make in regard to my treatment of Erasmus. This will be corrected this summer. - When you used the New Advent entry on Erasmus that you cite as your source, you used one idea from him that would lead an unfamiliar source to conclude that he was an unabashed supported of Luther and Luther’s break from the Church. Here is the source: newadvent.org/cathen/05510b.htm

Well, so far, I haven’t gleaned any insight into Luther, other than the quote “sin boldly” will be utilized by Roman Catholics who won’t read a context or do a little better research. I’m sorry Eden. - I was hoping to illustrate his coarseness as a means to emphasize that he was not inspired by the Holy Spirit. Why not write a balanced history of Luther? It would be much more accurate. Right now you are working on a “fluff piece” that is only suitable for the anti-Catholic site on which it appears. Why not aim higher than that and stop worrying about what “will be utilized by Roman Catholics” as though they are your enemy?

I appreciate your zeal and passion for your church. It is commendable. - **I am passionate about defending Christ’s Church. He is the reason for my passion. **

But, some of your methods of researching Luther are not the best. I understand many Catholics think negatively of Luther. -
Yes, many Catholics think negatively of him. Excommunication is a crime for which one can rarely go back- and he didn’t. He created the divide in Western Christendom.

However, certain arguments against him are flawed (like the “sin boldly” one). - ** Ironically, I use these kinds of statements to illustrated that Luther** was flawed.

You should stick with your arguments on authority. There, you were getting at some real issues. - Yes. I prayed about the Luther posts on here and this is where I was lead- authority, authority, authority.

If I haven’t been banned from here (not sure why this would happen), and, if you can tone it down a little, I would be interested in discussing this with you once my semester ends. -** I’d enjoy that very much- the discussion, not you getting banned.**

I understand that you have a curious interest in Catholic history but you associate yourself with vehement anti-Catholic sites. Maybe you can get past the gut feeling of repellence that hinders you from thinking from a Catholic perspective. It is a great burden, this repugnance for Catholicism.

 

[Mickey]

Eden:

Mickey, you were involved at some point because Tertium Quid has identified himself as an admirer of Svendsen and Engwer. Both men have committed time and energy to undermining the Catholic faith and confusing Catholics as to the truth of our faith.
One doesn’t need an “education” on Luther to know that these “discussions” come from an organized anti-Catholilc effort. You were completely just in involving yourself. Don’t let your important contributions to this thread become a victim of “revisionist” history as well! Pray for all of those who undermine our faith!

Yes Eden,

That is why I was drawn in–the association to the anti-Catholic agenda. But I have a dilemma. Whenever I am drawn into this, I tend to write with a somewhat uncharitable flavor. This bothers my conscience after the fact. Perhaps I am a bit scrupulous. (Didn’t Martin Luther have a serious problem with srcupulosity)?

I will bow out of the Luther dialogue. However, I may be forced to return if anti-Catholic links and references are posted again, because there are those on this forum who may not be familiar with the subtle yet vitriolic anti-Catholic content of some of these sites. And I pretty much know all the usual suspects. Gotta defend Christ’s true Church ya know!

P.S.–I have often prayed for the professional anti-Catholics and I also pray for the souls of Martin Luther and other reformers.

May the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you always.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_41.gif

 

[Jennie66]

Hi James,

I am not nearly as eloquent as the others who have answered your replies above, but I can say to you as one who was born, baptized, raised and confirmed a Lutheran and have since come into the Catholic Church - “I’ve been there and done that.” I’m so blessed to be in the Church that Jesus Christ founded - not the one founded by Martin Luther.

Blessings,

Jenny

 

[Eden]

Jennie66:

Hi James,

I am not nearly as eloquent as the others who have answered your replies above, but I can say to you as one who was born, baptized, raised and confirmed a Lutheran and have since come into the Catholic Church - “I’ve been there and done that.” I’m so blessed to be in the Church that Jesus Christ founded - not the one founded by Martin Luther.

Blessings,

Jenny

 

[Eden]

Jennie66:

Hi James,

I am not nearly as eloquent as the others who have answered your replies above, but I can say to you as one who was born, baptized, raised and confirmed a Lutheran and have since come into the Catholic Church - “I’ve been there and done that.” I’m so blessed to be in the Church that Jesus Christ founded - not the one founded by Martin Luther.

Blessings,

Jenny

Welcome, Jenny! Where have you been? We’ve needed you!

I was thinking of a great analogy between the Protestant churches and the Catholic Church for those who don’t understand what it’s like to be in Christ’s Church:

Think of yourself in a beautiful valley with meadows and mountains in the distance. You can smell the sweet flowers and fresh air. You can feel a light breeze and the warm gentle sun on your arms. Everything is still and peaceful. God is present in a very real and tangible way through His creation.

Then imagine a gifted artist, a man who experiences this beautiful scene of nature and decides to paint what he sees. He sees the mountains, the hills, the flowers but it is filtered through his own experiences - his own mind - his own interpretation. Art is beautiful because of what it represents. But it is one dimensional and does not capture the feeling or awe. It is man recreating God’s design. As such, it is flawed. The Protestant churches contain reflections - recreations - of God’s own design. There is beauty in those elements that are from the Divine. But only the Catholic Church is of divine origin. It is the creation of the Holy Spirit not of man. How could anyone *not *want to experience the real thing?

 

[TertiumQuid]

Mickey:

If the extensive study, research, and analysis, of Martin Luther, is for the worship and glory of God, then may the peace of the Lord assist you on your journey. However, if it is for the sole reason of proving others wrong who don’t agree with your conclusions through chatroom debates, it may be possible that pride and ego have entered the equation. (I’m not saying that is the case with you). Again, I apologize if I have offended you. My zeal gets skewed in these darn forums sometimes. Take care James.

Hi Mickey,

Thank you for the kind words.

Regards,
James Swan

 

[TertiumQuid]

Eden:

This is actually the most important discussion that we’ve had so far.

This is your response? The most important part of this dialog is your evaluation of my alleged “wounded pride”? Sorry, but this conversation with you is getting increasingly ridiculous. If you want to discuss Luther, that’s fine. If you want to do psychological evaluations on a total stranger, perhaps it would be more in the better interest of Catholic apologetics to take your opinions about me personally behind the scenes. Feel free to either e-mail me or use the C.A. private message system.

Eden:

I was directing my response at Catholics while describing any anti-Catholic work on Luther.

I suggest you go back and read your actual words in post #109. Indeed, your insults were directly pointed at me and my work on Luther.

Eden:

It was not the will of the Holy Spirit to break apart his Church. Luther worked on his own for that one. Yes. I can personally only conclude that if the Holy Spirit was not guiding Luther who was? The Holy Spirit was not the one who would benefit from Christians being apart. I’m sorry to be so blunt.

Just out of curiosity, was Satan behind the split of the Eastern churches? Was he guiding the Eastern fathers to break away from Rome? Who was it again who excommunicated the Eastern churches? What guided that man to invoke excommunication?

Eden:

You were referring to my “Luther education”.

Again, I don’t know what you’re talking about. I will say this, based on the way you misinterpreted Luther’s “sin boldly” statement more than once (and were corrected by myself and others), I do question how much you really know about the basic elements of Luther’s theology.

Eden:

It would be refreshing to see some criticism of Luther in your work. He was not a perfect man, nor are any of us. Your work becomes biased and can not be taken seriously by any true scholar- Catholic or Protestant because of this. While your opinion of him is much higher than my own it would lend more credibility to your research if you can concede some flaws. Your work, like the movie, becomes less about research and more about propaganda when that balance is lost.

I have pointed out in this very thread that I disagree with Luther on particular points (I’m not a Lutheran), and I also have noted some faults. Recall, i even faulted the Luther Movie! Even with Luther’s view of the canon, I don’t agree with Luther. It just so happens Roman Catholic arguments against him on the canon are flawed. Luther said incredibly stupid things in regards to the Jews, yet, he wasn’t a “Hitler” or a 21st Century anti-Semite. Rather, I see the propaganda coming from some Roman Catholics, particularly with “hit and run” citations (like the “sin boldly” one and the one about Christ being an adulterer). My good friend BJ Bear once said, “Propaganda is not effective when a proper context is given.”

Now this is the really funny part. You know that guy Dave Armstrong who’s work you utilize? Well, Dave and I have some big disagreements over Luther. I have nothing against Dave personally, in fact, I’ve pointed out that since dialoging here with folks at Catholic Answers, I have gained more respect for his work on Luther. I’m sure he’s a nice guy. But this is what’s funny. Dave Armstrong thinks some of my Luther work is valuable enough to link to from his web site. Go to this link for Armstrong’s site: ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ387.HTM Scroll down to “External links”. You will note, he links to two of my papers on Luther. Armstrong also says, “I respect James Swan for actually making some real arguments for a change, and doing some solid research and work, rather than simply accusing. I have links to his papers on Luther on my website.”

EDEN:

When you used the New Advent entry on Erasmus that you cite as your source, you used one idea from him that would lead an unfamiliar source to conclude that he was an unabashed supported of Luther and Luther’s break from the Church.

Um, hello Eden! The paper was about Erasmus and his opinion on the canon, not about Luther’s break with Rome or whether or not Erasmus supported it. The paper had nothing to do with what you’re talking about.

James Swan

 

[TertiumQuid]

EDEN:

I was hoping to illustrate his coarseness as a means to emphasize that he was not inspired by the Holy Spirit.

What? That’s why you were using the quote? That’s not what you said earlier. Remember what you misinterpreted Luther as saying- You said, * Whether I have the “correct translation” from the German or not, it is clear that Luther encouraged his followers to “sin and sin often” without the fear of losing salvation. (Can you imagine someone following this easy advice and after death- surprise! Shouldn’t have listened to Luther!* Why not just admit you had no idea of Luther’s concept of faith and works, and you mis-cited Luther?

EDEN:

. Right now you are working on a “fluff piece” that is only suitable for the anti-Catholic site on which it appears. Why not aim higher than that and stop worrying about what “will be utilized by Roman Catholics” as though they are your enemy?

Great big yawn at this point. More slander. Take this type of rhetoric to me privately.

James Swan

 

[Eden]

** “To thine own self be true.”**

 

[Jennie66]

Hello to you, too!

I am new to the Catholic Answers Forums, and just happened to be browsing through this one. As I said in my previous post, I am not nearly as eloquent as those of you who have been posting prior in this thread, but I am one who has been there (the Lutheran church), so I felt moved to add my two cents!

Blessings!

Jenny

 

[Jennie66]

Hi again!

I wanted to add to the above (but AOL went down on me!) that this is what begins and ends any discussion of either Luther or any of the other “reformers” for me - whose Church do you want to belong to? To the one founded by Jesus Christ Himself, who promised that “the gates of hell will not prevail against it,” and that He would be with it “always, until the end of time,” or to one of the over 50,000 Protestant churches founded by men? That is the **truly **simple question, and for me, the answer was likewise easy: I want to belong to the Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself, the Catholic Church!

Blessings and Viva il Papa, Benedict XVI!!!

Jenny

 

[Eden]

and

 

[CatherineofA]

There isn’t any substantial evidence that Jesus founded the Catholic Church but there is substantial evidence that it was around in the years of the early centuries Christians.

 

[Mickey]

CatherineofA:

There isn’t any substantial evidence that Jesus founded the Catholic Church but there is substantial evidence that it was around in the years of the early centuries Christians.

…and so are you saying that there was another church that Jesus founded, that was in exisitence before the Catholic christians of the early centuries, and this church no longer exists?

 

[Eden]

ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?Pgnu=1&Pg=Forum4&recnu=23&number=432027

catholic /christian
Question from mandy on 3/17/2005: ewtn.com/images/printer.gifI was wondering why when speaking with catholics that they do not refer to themselves as christians but call them selves catholics instead, aren’t both one in the same?

Answer by Catholic Answers on 3/26/2005:

Dear Mandy, Catholics were the first Christians. For Catholics “Christian” has come to include all those who have been baptized, including many who do not accept all of the deposit of the faith. For us, to be a Catholic is to accept all of the teachings of the early Church. Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

“When the truth is in your way, you are on the wrong road”