More precision on Martin Luther, 7 books "tossed out"

[JonNC]

As a matter of fact Jon, relating the actual historical facts about Luther’s disrespectful dealings with Holy Scripture is NOT ‘extreme anti-Luther rhetoric’. They are simply the facts. I fully recognize that these facts do not show Luther in a positive light, but that I guess would be the consequences of HIS actions.

Find me a single modern Catholic theologian who speaks of Luther’s devotion to scripture in the way you just did. They don’t , because they do not hold the same anti-Luther bias thT you have over and over displayed atCAF.

Jon

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Are you saying that the Orthodox understanding of infallibility being in the council, and in the pope, as they still believe is correct? I thought that Catholics believed that the 1850 declaration was just a response to what was known since the time of St Peter.
You know this is tongue in cheek, but I frankly don’t see a difference between Orthodoxy “adding books” and Luther and others in the west disputing books.

Jon

Yes, I am saying it is correct. The important point is Church infallibility. The Pope exercises Church Infallibility in a way peculiar to him alone. The Councils and for that matter, the Magisterium of the Church also participates in Church infallibility as our teachers, guided by the Holy Spirit. In fact all of the faithful have a participation in Church infallibility, in its own way, as the listening Church guided by the Holy Spirit. The West has a very legalistic mindset when it comes to infallibility, whereas the East has a more holistic attitude. That is why St. Pope John Paul II referred to the Church of the East and of the West as the lungs of the Church. Both are needed. However, keep in mind, that the Church of the East is within the fold of the Catholic Church. I refer to the Byzantine Catholics, who ARE the Church of the East under the Pope, as in Ancient times. The Orthodox Church continues schismatical, yet still retains Apostolic succession and the Seven Sacraments. However, it is not surprising that the longer the schism continues the further the two of us drift apart both theologically and doctrinally.

 

[Goya]

Since I think I am the only non-Catholic on the thread, I expect this is applied to me.
Again, in case you missed it, I don’t agree with Luther’s conclusion. I don’t agree with Cajetan’s similar conclusion on the DC’s. But I will defend the fact that they had similar opinions and the same liberty to express it.

Jon

No, not directed specifically at you (I would have replied to one of your posts–in fact, your reply beat mine by a matter of mins, if not seconds, so I had to C&P his post to make it a reply–rather than ^^^ pointing to it). It was directed at Topper’s point, and in general, at so many prior exchanges with so many other Protestants, who hold ML in an inordinately high esteem–who seemingly feel compelled to defend every action taken and/or word uttered by him.

fwiw.

In regards to Cardinal Cajetan–he held an opinion; he did not seek to undermine the Church’s authority over it.

That is a monumental difference from Luther. He respected the Church’s authority; ML disdained it. Mocked it. Even condescended down to it. Christ’s Church. This was before he founded his own.

He was given countless chances to repent, and reconcile–alas, his desire was never to “Reform” Christ’s Church; it was always (at least from very early on)–to revolt against it, and found his own, with himself as its head.

He thought very highly of himself. VERY highly. He took narcissism to heights heretofore unknown; was the antithesis of humility; and was an agent of the Devil; not a Christian.

His disdain for the Word of God–where he actually held his own opinion as superior to it–is evidence of this.

I’ll leave it at–my opinion of Marty, is significantly less than his, of himself.

 

[guanophore]

I actually don’t Understand how Sola Scriptura would ever possibly work out without a closed Canon. Can a Lutheran use the “lesser books” for doctrine or not? Why are there wide variances among Lutheran synods ELCA, Wels, LCMS? I wonder if this is part of the reason.

It is a puzzle about the SS and the unclosed canon. It is my understanding that the Lutheran position is that the books abrogated by Luther as “apocrophal” are not to be used for doctrine (even though Jerome used them that way).

I don’t think that is the reason for the wide variances among Lutheran synods, though. I think that has it’s seed in the separation from the successor of Peter, the visible sign of unity on earth. I think that Sola Scriptura is also a major factor in that. Although it was not intented to be used that way, the modern practice of it is separated from the Sacred Traditions of the Church.

The Lutheran varied synods, just like dissenting Catholics, have departed from a greater or lesser extent from the core foundations of the faith. Lutherans have abandoned the Confessions and Creeds which causes splitting, division, and drifting from the Apostolic faith.

 Regarding the canon?   Two points:

1. Trent set that rule, not in 382. Had it been set in 382, a cardinal could not have challenged it without consequences.

Questioning is not the same as challenging. Jerome had opinions about the books, but deferred to the authority of the Church. If you look at the post directly above yours, you will see that the canon reviewed at Florence was consistent with that of 382. The “consequences” came from rejecting this long held belief and practice of the Church.

2). Luther was no longer under the authority of the pope. The pope’s authority applies only to those in communion with him. That’s why the Orthodox can have a different canon without the pope’s approval.

Jon

I am sure he did not believe he was, but he was mistaken. The popes authority applies to all who are members of the flock of Christ. Jesus placed Peter as shepherd of the flock,He did not create any jurisdictional boundaries. The successor of Peter has a number of rebellious subjects.

 

[guanophore]

How is that different? If the canon was set infallibly by the pope in the 4th century, then that is the canon. No? Isn’t adding to scripture prohibited? Where do the Orthodox, before the Schism, get the authority to add books to the canon? Or from the other view, where does a lone bishop, without ecumenical council of all the bishops , get authority without a council?

Jon

Infallibilty is a gift that is given to the Church. What happened at the Council of Rome was an affirmation of the Old and New Testament canon in a decretal, sometimes referred to as the damasine list. This list was not created at that time, but was the one used by the Church prior to that point. Other councils affirmed this as well ( Council of Hippo 392, and Council of Carthage 396 AD.)

The Eastern Church did not “add” the books, they received them from the prior Jewish canon, which was slightly different than the Septuagint canon received in the West.

Luther’s disrespect for the Scriptures was only one of the ‘liberties’ he took. Granted there were a VERY FEW Catholics on the previous 1000 years who had questioned the canon, and NONE of them to the extent that Luther did. But that is not the worst of it. With Luther, his disrespect for Holy Scripture and his placing his personal opinions over the judgment of the whole Church on the canon was only a small part of his Revolt. As we have discussed recently, there were over 50 other things on which Luther exhibited his supposed ‘liberty’ and a lot of them were just as critical as the canon. When you consider ALL that he felt at ‘liberty’ to criticize/condemn/denounce/etc, it is EXTREMELY clear what he was really up to.

I have to admit, I find Luther’s language and style abhorrent. When one compares the language he uses to that of Cajetan or Jerome with regard to the canon, it is grossly disrespettful. It is true that there are many other writings of his that are even worse, which is why it is appalling that anyone would want to characteriize their faith in God by his name.

 

[Michael_Francis]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.