S
Salibi
Guest
We cannot deny Luther’s role in bringing these abuses to the fore. Without him, they might have continued longer than they had.
Indeed, the Church owes a great debt to Luther.
- Status
Indeed, the Church owes a great debt to Luther.
D
DENNYINMI
Guest
Persons followed him at their own peril, yet the Church instituted by Christ Himself remained. I work out my own salvation with fear and trembling and blame my personal fate on no one, I’ll stand alone before the Lord for myself, alone.
Regarding your comment, the Church doesn’t “teach” pedophilia or homo-sexuality as dogma either, yet it’s leaders have engaged in it to the detriment of the Body of Christ, and at the time of Luther, yes, they were engaging in indulgences in a way unworthy of the Church of Christ.
The sheep follow the shepherd but only until they’re hurt by them, and then they’ll run from them.
We’ve made mistakes, Luther’s mistake was throwing the baby out with the bath water but he cannot be dug up and blamed for every dissent of every follower when scandals that are NOT even of theological issues have arisen.
T
TMC
Guest
I agree with this view, and I think the Church does also. It is more than just indulgences, much of what Luther said was correct (although, like most reformers, he was also wrong in some important ways). Pope Benedict spoke approvingly of Luther, and Pope Francis seems to feel the same way. It is odd to me that it appears one of the stumbling blocks to the Church’s relationship with the Lutheran Church seems to be a relatively small group’s personal animosity towards someone that has been dead for many years.
T
TMC
Guest
I don’t think you can lay the chaos and destruction at the feet of Luther. The truth is that the chaos and destruction you describe is more accurately attributed to the excesses and abuses rampant within the Church. Luther was the most prominent one pointing them out, but he did not create that situation. No one (or very few) would have followed him if it were not for the very real problems in the Church.
N
niceatheist
Guest
One thing that is critical to understanding the Reformation is who it was that Luther convinced. He had no real interest in concern in the peasant toiling in the fields, or the craftsman or the merchant. The people who bought into Luther’s ideas were German princes, and that leads us back to crises between the Church and the Holy Roman Empire, that began with the Investiture Controversy four hundred years before. There had been growing restiveness for centuries between German rulers and Rome as Rome asserted an ever stronger role in temporal affairs, whilst the Holy Roman Emperors wanted to re-establish the Carolingian system with the Emperor in the pre-eminent position.
This cold war between Rome and German princes was further inflamed by the Avignon Papacy. For the German princes this represented a full co-opting of the Papacy by the French Kings. The Avignon Papacy pretty thoroughly discredited the institution in Northern Europe. The Church had gone from being the Emperor’s competitor, to being enslaved to the French Crown. While Charles V remained loyal to Rome, many other German princes saw Luther’s breach with Rome as the opportunity to make their own break, and here they had a ready-made theology. The common churchgoer in many parts of Germany and in Scandinavia were just along for the ride.
And Luther knew which side of the bread was buttered, because some of his most vociferous invective came as he gained royal backers. He had started at a position not a hundred miles away from Erasmus, and I’d argue that Luther didn’t say much, at least on theological grounds, that Augustine hadn’t said a thousand years before. But the key was that the Reformation was fundamentally political, the break from Rome wasn’t just over the nature of salvation or the sale of indulgences, it was part of a larger growing struggle between France and the Holy Roman Empire.
This cold war between Rome and German princes was further inflamed by the Avignon Papacy. For the German princes this represented a full co-opting of the Papacy by the French Kings. The Avignon Papacy pretty thoroughly discredited the institution in Northern Europe. The Church had gone from being the Emperor’s competitor, to being enslaved to the French Crown. While Charles V remained loyal to Rome, many other German princes saw Luther’s breach with Rome as the opportunity to make their own break, and here they had a ready-made theology. The common churchgoer in many parts of Germany and in Scandinavia were just along for the ride.
And Luther knew which side of the bread was buttered, because some of his most vociferous invective came as he gained royal backers. He had started at a position not a hundred miles away from Erasmus, and I’d argue that Luther didn’t say much, at least on theological grounds, that Augustine hadn’t said a thousand years before. But the key was that the Reformation was fundamentally political, the break from Rome wasn’t just over the nature of salvation or the sale of indulgences, it was part of a larger growing struggle between France and the Holy Roman Empire.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
We owe our debt to God and the protection He promised us from Him and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Luther worked to destroy the Church. All this is brought out in the documentary.
Even when I was a protestant I learned that he wasn’t out to fix the Catholic church but to attack it.
Last edited:
S
Salibi
Guest
Oh yes. The factual, obviously unbiased, not at all anti-Lutheran documentary. Thanks for pointing that out.
I’m Catholic, yet I don’t see the point in such senseless bashing. Luther was wrong about many things, right about some things, and painting him as a sort of Antichrist ultimately serves no purpose other than indulging the unChristian, vengeful tendencies of fanatics and loonies. Indeed, it’s actually detrimental to the Church and contrary to its message, since it wrecks havoc on ecumenism.
Last edited:
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
I’m not bashing. I am an ex-protestant. I learned as a protestant that Luther was out to destroy what he saw was the anti-Christ. I have been back in the Church for 10 years, and most everything in that documentary I had already learned as a protestant but have rarely heard as a Catholic. The documentary just pointed out things already known.
N
niceatheist
Guest
As well as a healthy dose of invention. There’s no evidence Luther was a murderer. It’s a modern day fabrication.Salibi:
I’m not bashing. I am an ex-protestant. I learned as a protestant that Luther was out to destroy what he saw was the anti-Christ. I have been back in the Church for 10 years, and most everything in that documentary I had already learned as a protestant but have rarely heard as a Catholic. The documentary just pointed out things already known.
S
Salibi
Guest
Of course. I wasn’t accusing you of bashing-just the film and filmmaker.
S
Salibi
Guest
Like I said, I’m Catholic and I don’t believe in what Luther taught nor agree with what he did, but it’s not right to falsely accuse the man.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
If you are referring to the dual, that could be. I haven’t looked into it but as far as the death of priests and nuns and destruction of convents and monastaries and churches, that is not a modern day fabrication. I heard all that as a protestant, in a protestant book on the history of Martin Luther.
I was actually reading the book to my family as we homeschooled, protestant at the time. I had to stop reading the book to my family because I couldn’t stand how he was being praised for doing such things and I didn’t want my family to think that we praise someone for such horrible acts.
God bless.
T
TMC
Guest
Thanks for the historical background. I suspect what you say is correct, and I think it supports my point that deeper issues lead to the Reformation and the rise of Protestant Christian sects.
Last edited:
N
niceatheist
Guest
It wasn’t even the first reformation. It was just the first one that stuck.niceatheist:
Thanks for the historical background. I suspect what you say is correct, and I think it supports my point that deeper issues that lead to the Reformation and the rise of Protestant Christian sects.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
For we have received the Council of Trent.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
Okay, yes. Definitely agree.
M
mcq72
Guest
I have heard more books have been written about Luther than any other reformer and then some. Not sure anything new can be said or found out about the man.
M
mcq72
Guest
Haven’t checked every post, but what is the name of the film, and is it a “documentary”?..I never watch any film without first checking reviews, even Rotten Tomatoes lol
PS -from the few posts I have read I am surprised it has not been closed down…quite extreme, innacurate and definitely uncharitable.
PS -from the few posts I have read I am surprised it has not been closed down…quite extreme, innacurate and definitely uncharitable.
Last edited:
What form of “Protestant “ were you?Salibi:
I’m not bashing. I am an ex-protestant. I learned as a protestant that Luther was out to destroy what he saw was the anti-Christ. I have been back in the Church for 10 years, and most everything in that documentary I had already learned as a protestant but have rarely heard as a Catholic. The documentary just pointed out things already known.
There are many “Protestant “ communions who have no more in common with Luther than they do with Rome.
- Status