Martin Luther

[JHow]

…Let’s not forget Luther’s anti-Semitism was the root of the Holocaust…

This a hugely anchronistic argument - the two things are separated by centuries. Prominent Lutherans like Dietrich Bonhoeffer or Martin Niemöller opposed Hitler and didn’t sacrifice Lutheran theology by doing so.

 

[JonNC]

This a hugely anchronistic argument - the two things are separated by centuries. Prominent Lutherans like Dietrich Bonhoeffer or Martin Niemöller opposed Hitler and didn’t sacrifice Lutheran theology by doing so.

Thanks, JHow. And please let me say that in bring up Eck I in no way was implying that the CC today, or even then doctrinally supported anti-judaism. Lutherans and Catholics together in harmony reject anti-semitism.

Jon

 

[kotim]

PbloPicasso
You should have given that priest who tried to sexually take advantage of you a great ruddy flogging. Then you should have gone to the Bishop and if he did not get rid of the priest then you give that Bishop a ruddy great flogging. Such people are nothing but filth and germs on the Church who seek

Christ does not call us to be purely pacifists. When we let evil continue we are as responsbile as those who commit such offences.

I see everything in black and white, but like all other people the greyeness occurs when we form some sort of emotional relationships with people who we later find out do something that is black and white wrong.

Corruption always starts at the top and flows down, that is why Pope Benedict stated that homosexuals should not be ordained etc. Vice leads to vice and that is exactly what happened to Luther. He was eventually led astray by his vices and scruples to the point that whatever he thought needed to be tidied up was no longer the case.

 

[JonNC]

PbloPicasso
You should have given that priest who tried to sexually take advantage of you a great ruddy flogging. Then you should have gone to the Bishop and if he did not get rid of the priest then you give that Bishop a ruddy great flogging. Such people are nothing but filth and germs on the Church who seek

Christ does not call us to be purely pacifists. When we let evil continue we are as responsbile as those who commit such offences.

I see everything in black and white, but like all other people the greyeness occurs when we form some sort of emotional relationships with people who we later find out do something that is black and white wrong.

Corruption always starts at the top and flows down, that is why Pope Benedict stated that homosexuals should not be ordained etc. Vice leads to vice and that is exactly what happened to Luther. He was eventually led astray by his vices and scruples to the point that whatever he thought needed to be tidied up was no longer the case.

Hmm, what vices would those be?

Jon

 

[PbloPicasso]

By their fruits you shall know them… God did NOT prompt Luther to rebellion. Compare the lives of Francis of Assisi, who responded to rebuild the Church, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, François de Sales… and then look at Luther, Calvin, Zwigli… please, while there had been plenty of corrupt men in the ranks of the Catholic clergy, the amount of true saints is overwhelming. Not one of the Protestant deformers could hold a candle to them. Least of whom Martin Luther.

You hit the nail on the head and why I converted back to the Catholic Church as well as stand by her even in the face of all the chaos - even the “sex scandals” that the Church from which we and the Church are being unfairly chastised.

 

[PbloPicasso]

PbloPicasso
You should have given that priest who tried to sexually take advantage of you a great ruddy flogging. Then you should have gone to the Bishop and if he did not get rid of the priest then you give that Bishop a ruddy great flogging. Such people are nothing but filth and germs on the Church who seek

Christ does not call us to be purely pacifists. When we let evil continue we are as responsbile as those who commit such offences.

I see everything in black and white, but like all other people the greyeness occurs when we form some sort of emotional relationships with people who we later find out do something that is black and white wrong.

Corruption always starts at the top and flows down, that is why Pope Benedict stated that homosexuals should not be ordained etc. Vice leads to vice and that is exactly what happened to Luther. He was eventually led astray by his vices and scruples to the point that whatever he thought needed to be tidied up was no longer the case.

The irony is that I was pretty good in matial arts, since we had a Vietnamese Teacher, who became a Jesuit, and my best friend, a Vocation Director, priest, soon to be Benedictine Monk/Priest.

I often wondered how I would react, but proved my obedience to not harm even a vile priest. The priest violated my trust that I had misplaced in him as a spiritual director, professor and friend. Thankfully I know enough priests that did not fall into this sinful spirit.

 

[hn160]

Luther never set out to split from the Church but while many, including the Pope and Erasmus, sympathized with and sided with his call against corruption, the errors of Luther were confronted and refuted several times.

Luther reacted with arrogance and pride, and took his buddies with him.

Later on, when the Anabaptists (denying sola fide and infant baptism) broke away from the Lutherans due to their own personal interpretations that disagreed with those of Luther, Luther’s only recourse was to appeal for help from the secular powers.

Luther couldn’t appeal to Scripture, nor assert his “authority” over the Anabaptists – those people used Luther’s own weapons against him, the Bible (the Catholic book itself).

I wouldn’t be proud to be a Lutheran. Luther threw out books of the OT, would have thrown out James, Hebrews and Revelation… and yet he believed in Sola Scriptura, all the while wanting to reduce the size of Scripture to reject anything that didn’t agree with his personal interpretation.

Let’s not forget Luther’s anti-Semitism was the root of the Holocaust:

awitness.org/books/luther/on_jews_and_their_lies_p2.html

By their fruits you shall know them… God did NOT prompt Luther to rebellion. Compare the lives of Francis of Assisi, who responded to rebuild the Church, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, François de Sales… and then look at Luther, Calvin, Zwigli… please, while there had been plenty of corrupt men in the ranks of the Catholic clergy, the amount of true saints is overwhelming. Not one of the Protestant deformers could hold a candle to them. Least of whom Martin Luther.

You seem to forget that Hitler and other high ranking Nazis were Roman Catholic, I doubt that Luther had anything to do the Holocaust. There was anti-Semitism in all countries through out the ages in Europe.

 

[PbloPicasso]

You seem to forget that Hitler and other high ranking Nazis were Roman Catholic, I doubt that Luther had anything to do the Holocaust. There was anti-Semitism in all countries through out the ages in Europe.

And they were very anti-Catholic as well. They loathed the Church and killed Catholics to insure the Vatican would keep it’s mouth shut. It’s useful to have hostages to control leaders working against you.

 

[AnAnglican]

Let me first say I am neither a Luthern or Roman Catholic. I am from the Anglican side of the house. Here is what I would say to each side;

To my Lutheran I would say you are correct that Martin Luther set out to reform the Roman Catholic and to bring her back to the faith and doctrine of the undivided church. More over, I would say there are even some Roman Catholics such as Peter Kreeft who would agree with you. However, God did found only one Church and it is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic with one head – Jesus Christ. You must never forget that.

Isay thismy Roman Brethen I would say this. To claim for Rome that its bisihip ordanary to be hte visible head of the church with membership therin required for salvation is highy arrogant and historically false. An unbiased look at church history shows that while there was a church in Rome, the term Roman Catholic came into use alog with the term Eastern Ortthodox only after the great schism of 1054.whcic split the church in half. History also tells us that the roman bishop made claim to universal jusidiction several time and was soundly and repeatedly rejected by the undivided church. Further, when the Pope oversteped his canonical and ecclisiastical authoirty by demnding the eatern havlf the church add the filique and threatening excomunication by not adding the filioque and acceprting him and the head of the church, he broke with the polity, canon law and theology of the undivied church. The polity of the early church was Jesus Christ was the head of the church and the apolsotlic and canonic authority handed to the Aposltes by Christ himself and extended to the Bishop was the bishops exercise of that authority was limited to the diocese of that particular bishop. Addittionly, while I believe the filioque to e correct and scriptural, the church approved version as set forth in the Counsil of Constantinople in 381 did not contain the filioque and was thee official doctrime of the undivided church. To change the creed would have taken a general counsil ith the bishop of Rome could have ask for according to Acts. The Patriach of Constantinople could have done this as wll but it must be noted The Patriach was well within his rights to reject both demands. Finally, the contined existance of both Protestants and Eastern Orthadoxy of the RCC’s ongoing error and prima facie evidence denial of the canons and counsils of the early undivided church.

As an Aglican, I often get asked the folowing question – Protestant or Catholic. My answer is yes and has to be.for now.

I hope my two cents worth has helped.

 

[ForeverGrace]

The important thing to remember still is that the Catholic Church is the Church of Jesus Christ Himself. The lutheran church is the church of martin luther.

Hmmm! That’s a view I’ve never heard before. ‘Catholic’ means universal and I daresay that a good many Catholics would not want to be associated with any religious group with a universalist label. The contrast is of course different now than it once was. Today there is a Universalist church and according to them, everyone will go to heaven… they just have to be good. I’m hoping the heretic Rob Bell will find a home there.

Martin Luther had no intent to leave the Catholic church. But he wanted it to reform itself and many Catholics agree, that it did need to be reformed. Two back-to-back Popes who were consumed with themselves left the faithful in a position to be abused, and… they were abused.

The Lutheran church uses the label “Lutherans”, not to elevate Martin Luther, but to affirm that they held to his teachings which come from the New Testament. I know many Lutherans and they simply do not hold that Luther should be elevated. The Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, etc. all use a different title that is discriptive regarding their interpretation of New Testament doctrine. No more, no less.

Last, I find it amusing that some folks are appalled about Luther and the death penalty, but don’t seem to have any problem with burning heretics at the stake. Is that not a death penalty? Just asking.

Luther was not a perfect person. However many representatives of Catholicism were just as imperfect. Pope Benedict XVI, has called for Catholics to reevaluate and reconsider Luther’s excommunication. He seems to be a wise man and I respect him.

 

[JonNC]

Let me first say I am neither a Luthern or Roman Catholic. I am from the Anglican side of the house. Here is what I would say to each side;

To my Lutheran I would say you are correct that Martin Luther set out to reform the Roman Catholic and to bring her back to the faith and doctrine of the undivided church. More over, I would say there are even some Roman Catholics such as Peter Kreeft who would agree with you. However, God did found only one Church and it is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic with one head – Jesus Christ. You must never forget that.

Here here!! You are exactly correct. It has been 500 years, and it is easy for us to forget the intent of the Reformation - and that was to reform the Church (singular). The success or failure of the Reformation falls on one principle, and that is reconciliation and unity in the true faith. Without these, if we become too comfortable with division, then the Reformation more resembles what some Catholics here polemically call “deformation”.

Jon

 

[AnAnglican]

Here here!! You are exactly correct. It has been 500 years, and it is easy for us to forget the intent of the Reformation - and that was to reform the Church (singular). The success or failure of the Reformation falls on one principle, and that is reconciliation and unity in the true faith. Without these, if we become too comfortable with division, then the Reformation more resembles what some Catholics here polemically call “deformation”.

Jon

Dear JonNC:

Thanks so much for the kind words. Let me be totally honest and tranparent here regarding the polemical use of the word "deformation. by Roman Catholics. To a certain extent they are correct. As an Anglican, I must admit that some provinces have deformed. The Episcopal Church in The USA is an excellant example.When I was convfirmed in the summer of 1975, ECUSA still used the 1928 edition of the Book of Common Prayer, The mass contained therein was a word for word translation of the Sarum Rite. Some theologically liberal Epsicopal bishops thought this mass to be too harsh for the modern church. An example of this was in the general confession where the following phrases are found – “We do eatrnestly repent and are heartily sorry for these our misdoings; the remembrance of them iws grevous unto us; the burden of them is intolorable”. Add to this ECUSA refusal to onform the the scritural, canoical, and tradional prohibition against women recieving the sacrament of Holy Orders bu the early church, any reformation in that church must come from ECUSA confessig its error and repenting of them. In my opinion, the current state of ECUSA resembles more my efforts off the golf tea. It ay look good at the start but has now drifted so far offline it can not possibly hit the fairway of orthadox theology. In tihis case, deformation is accurate.

 

[GKC]

Dear JonNC:

Thanks so much for the kind words. Let me be totally honest and tranparent here regarding the polemical use of the word "deformation. by Roman Catholics. To a certain extent they are correct. As an Anglican, I must admit that some provinces have deformed. The Episcopal Church in The USA is an excellant example.When I was convfirmed in the summer of 1975, ECUSA still used the 1928 edition of the Book of Common Prayer, The mass contained therein was a word for word translation of the Sarum Rite. Some theologically liberal Epsicopal bishops thought this mass to be too harsh for the modern church. An example of this was in the general confession where the following phrases are found – “We do eatrnestly repent and are heartily sorry for these our misdoings; the remembrance of them iws grevous unto us; the burden of them is intolorable”. Add to this ECUSA refusal to onform the the scritural, canoical, and tradional prohibition against women recieving the sacrament of Holy Orders bu the early church, any reformation in that church must come from ECUSA confessig its error and repenting of them. In my opinion, the current state of ECUSA resembles more my efforts off the golf tea. It ay look good at the start but has now drifted so far offline it can not possibly hit the fairway of orthadox theology. In tihis case, deformation is accurate.

Concur.

GKC

 

[JonNC]

Dear JonNC:

Thanks so much for the kind words. Let me be totally honest and tranparent here regarding the polemical use of the word "deformation. by Roman Catholics. To a certain extent they are correct. As an Anglican, I must admit that some provinces have deformed. The Episcopal Church in The USA is an excellant example.When I was convfirmed in the summer of 1975, ECUSA still used the 1928 edition of the Book of Common Prayer, The mass contained therein was a word for word translation of the Sarum Rite. Some theologically liberal Epsicopal bishops thought this mass to be too harsh for the modern church. An example of this was in the general confession where the following phrases are found – “We do eatrnestly repent and are heartily sorry for these our misdoings; the remembrance of them iws grevous unto us; the burden of them is intolorable”. Add to this ECUSA refusal to onform the the scritural, canoical, and tradional prohibition against women recieving the sacrament of Holy Orders bu the early church, any reformation in that church must come from ECUSA confessig its error and repenting of them. In my opinion, the current state of ECUSA resembles more my efforts off the golf tea. It ay look good at the start but has now drifted so far offline it can not possibly hit the fairway of orthadox theology. In tihis case, deformation is accurate.

With the dearest of love and caring for my friends and family who continue to strive within its ranks, I have a simlar view of the ELCA as a synod (not necessarily all of its members).

I have often pondered allowed here why our more liberal branches of Anglicanism and Lutheranism are in communion, and yet we more conservative Anglicans and Lutherans are not there yet. Perhaps the answer is self-evident in that we each adhere tightly to our historic doctrines, but from what I’ve read, we are exceptionally close.

Jon

 

[Bilbo_Baggins_1]

Where on the spectrum is the more recently formed ACNA? If they are of a more conservative persuasion as I had been informed, the continuing talks between themselves and the LCMS could hopefully become more of a starting point for these type of moving towards communion among the more conservative branches. From the panel discussion in Fort Wayne last night it seems there have been fruits to these talks (although several issues were rather bluntly, though correctly in my opinion, stated by Pres. Harrison).

 

[hn160]

With the dearest of love and caring for my friends and family who continue to strive within its ranks, I have a simlar view of the ELCA as a synod (not necessarily all of its members).

I have often pondered allowed here why our more liberal branches of Anglicanism and Lutheranism are in communion, and yet we more conservative Anglicans and Lutherans are not there yet. Perhaps the answer is self-evident in that we each adhere tightly to our historic doctrines, but from what I’ve read, we are exceptionally close.

Jon

The third dialogue between the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and The Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod (LCMS) on “Contemporary Issues Facing the Church in North America,” began on 27 October 2011 on the campus of Concordia Theological Seminary Fort Wayne. Presentations engaged the question of the ordination of women to the office of Holy Ministry and on other challenges facing the church such as post-humanism and trans-humanism. The first dialogue, held 10-11 November 2010 in Saint Louis at Concordia Seminary, focused on the historical backgrounds of the ANCA and the LCMS. The second dialogue, held 12-13 May 2011 held in Bluebell, PA at the Reformed Episcopal Seminary, focused on the question of authority, both Scriptural authority and ecclesial authority.

Participants from the Anglican Church in North America (ANCA) included: Dr. Grant LeMarquand, Professor of Biblical Studies and Mission at Trinity School for Ministry, Dr. Jonathan Riches, Assistant Academic Dean and Associate Professor of Liturgics and Theology at the Reformed Episcopal Seminary, and Bishop Ray Sutton, Diocese of Mid-America, REC/ACNA and Chair of Ecumenical Relations Task Force (ACNA).

Participants from the LCMS included: Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison, President, Dr. Frederic Baue, Pastor Emeritus, Dr. Albert Collver, Director of Church Relations, Dr. Joel Lehenbauer, Executive Director of the CTCR, Dr. Lawrence Rast, President of Concordia Theological Seminary, and Rev. Larry Vogel, Associate Executive Director CTCR.
While there are many areas of agreement between the ACNA and the LCMS, there also are differences. The dialogue has taken an open and honest approach in recognizing differences between the church bodies. President Harrison noted that Herman Sasse said that there is more fellowship between Christians who honestly disagree with one another than with Christians who gloss over or who agree to disagree about their differences.

At 7 PM, there will be an Open Forum, featuring President Matthew Harrison of the LCMS and Dr. Jonathan Riches of the Reformed Episcopal Seminary, speaking about contemporary issues facing the church. The public is invited to attend the open forum.

 

[Contarini]

The third dialogue between the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and The Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod (LCMS) on “Contemporary Issues Facing the Church in North America,” began on 27 October 2011 on the campus of Concordia Theological Seminary Fort Wayne. Presentations engaged the question of the ordination of women to the office of Holy Ministry and on other challenges facing the church such as post-humanism and trans-humanism. The first dialogue, held 10-11 November 2010 in Saint Louis at Concordia Seminary, focused on the historical backgrounds of the ANCA and the LCMS. The second dialogue, held 12-13 May 2011 held in Bluebell, PA at the Reformed Episcopal Seminary, focused on the question of authority, both Scriptural authority and ecclesial authority.

Participants from the Anglican Church in North America (ANCA) included: Dr. Grant LeMarquand, Professor of Biblical Studies and Mission at Trinity School for Ministry, Dr. Jonathan Riches, Assistant Academic Dean and Associate Professor of Liturgics and Theology at the Reformed Episcopal Seminary, and Bishop Ray Sutton, Diocese of Mid-America, REC/ACNA and Chair of Ecumenical Relations Task Force (ACNA).

Participants from the LCMS included: Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison, President, Dr. Frederic Baue, Pastor Emeritus, Dr. Albert Collver, Director of Church Relations, Dr. Joel Lehenbauer, Executive Director of the CTCR, Dr. Lawrence Rast, President of Concordia Theological Seminary, and Rev. Larry Vogel, Associate Executive Director CTCR.
While there are many areas of agreement between the ACNA and the LCMS, there also are differences. The dialogue has taken an open and honest approach in recognizing differences between the church bodies. President Harrison noted that Herman Sasse said that there is more fellowship between Christians who honestly disagree with one another than with Christians who gloss over or who agree to disagree about their differences.

At 7 PM, there will be an Open Forum, featuring President Matthew Harrison of the LCMS and Dr. Jonathan Riches of the Reformed Episcopal Seminary, speaking about contemporary issues facing the church. The public is invited to attend the open forum.

I had no idea this was going on. It’s practically in my backyard (well, not right now, because I’m in Fort Worth for a conference!).

 

[Bilbo_Baggins_1]

You can watch the statements by President Harrison and Dr. Riches along with the following panel discussion here:

livestre.am/16ijA

 

[1voice]

Well, this was the point of my thoughts posted here. Persoanally, I see Martin Luther as a victim more than as a heretic. He wasn’t the only one guilty of heresy. Many of the leaders wearing the collar were just as guilty from my resources. However, there is one truth, not multiple truths. I believe many from Rome exagerated the importance of things that were and are not Church teaching. In fact, they tipped their hat to going ahead with killing anyone that was a heretic, whether in good conscience or not. The point is that I know it was the culture of the time, but it still went against Christ example. Christ gave the authority to the Church, not individuals. But the conglomerate of the Church is, from my understanding of history, abused that authority for selfish gain, even if it was simply self-preservation. There is not difference between a leader of a country giving the okay to takes someone’s head off or slamming the axe themselves. Therefore, Church leaders that promoted that are guilty of some pretty bad things from my understanding.

Okay, now Lutheran’s, if Christ is the leader, should go by a different name that Luther as the founder. That is why Catholics accuse Lutheran’s to as they do…in part. There is only ONE TRUE CHURCH, not multiple ones, which implies multiple truths. And since the Catholic Church’s leaders are in charge, Luther had no right to superimpose his authority over that of the Church’s. But, I suspect that God intended to use Martin Luther to force the had of the Church into reform. The consequences of the Church not reforming would have reaped far worse consequences in my opinion. But, I’m no authority as we all know.

I’m merely trying to be impartial to the situation in order to rake over the multiple ecclesial communities out there. All Christians should go back to Rome, so to speak, in order to start from there to work out differences. No one should break off from anyone. That should have been implied if not out right stated in scripture, which I believe it to be the case.

I think the Catholics that accuse Luter do it because he was fundamentally right in his assessment of the condition of the Catholic church at that time… and they want, with all of their wanting … to unscramble eggs… but it always comes to … blaming Luther … because they are fundamentally biased toward their team. Im a Steeler fan myself … Born and bred.

The proof is in the puddin … They threw out Luther ( I know, I know … They didnt fire him… he quit) … but, within short order they codified much of what he demanded.
They never would have budged if they didnt stop losing members in droves (half of the German kingdoms)… thats a lot of money. It would be the equivalent of losing half of the Federal taxes from CA or TX … it woke them way up.

 

[PbloPicasso]

I think the Catholics that accuse Luter do it because he was fundamentally right in his assessment of the condition of the Catholic church at that time… and they want, with all of their wanting … to unscramble eggs… but it always comes to … blaming Luther … because they are fundamentally biased toward their team. Im a Steeler fan myself … Born and bred.

The proof is in the puddin … They threw out Luther … but did exactly what he demanded.
They never would have budged if they didn’t stop losing members in droves.

His methods are what got him into trouble. Understandably, he was afraid. I know that I would be considering the culture of the time. But, this is where Catholics [pulled miter out now and placing on head] pull out the Matt 23 card, “Chair of Moses”. You are subscribing to dissent and continue to do so by your statements. Luther was a prideful man - arrogant. I feel saddened by the threats of death. It’s interesting to see the slant people put on such men and women in history. Even if Luther was right, he went way too far because of pride. Though I agree with many of the things he said, I do not believe he had the right or the grace to handle it in a better way. Division is never good.