Shocking things everyone should know about Luther

[AliciaCL]

In spite of the issues of theology and history betweeen Luther and the Catholic Church, it is important to remember that an extremely key dispute has to some degree been resolved. In short, Catholicism and Lutheranism agree on justification or the means to salvation. My stab at summarizing it is we’re save by grace which is exhibited through faith and good works. Saved by faith alone and once saved always saved and the good works controversy somewhat boils down to semantics, misunderstanding of vocabulary and what is necessarily incorporated into the words and phrases of faith and good works. See the link to the 1999 formalized document of agreement:

JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

 

[Ginger2]

You don’t want to hear it, but the canon of the Bible was settled once and for all in the 4th century.

Then why no complaints about those in the RC who denied the in spirartion of the Deuteros? If the canon had truly been settled those I mentioned earlier who wrote their opinions of what was and was not inspired would have been guilty of denying inspired Scriptures. If the canon "was settled once and for all in the 4th century, Jerome would have been a heretic for denying the inspiration of the deutoeros.

Those 7 books were suspected by some Jews, Jerome, and Luther, but the Church Fathers considered them canon and said so.

Jerome is one of the church fathers. And Jerome did not just suspect those books were not inspired, he declared it - in the text of the Vulgate. **The pope allowed Jerome to deny these 7 books in the Vulgate thus giving credence to the denial ** No one has ever been allowed to deny Catholic doctrine within the pages of the Catholic Bible. I assert the pope agreed with Jerome or he would not have allowed the denial to become part of the Bible.

Jesus used the Septuagint, and the earliest xians (Xian-Jews) used it.

Jesus never quoted the deuteros nor even alluded to them. Jesus was from the pharisaic sect of Jews. Jesus set the Old Testament canon as the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms - in direct contrast to the Sadducees and Essenes. Jesus affirmed the Pharisaic doctrine of the resurrection of the body and the eternal life of the soul - in direct contrast to the Sadducees and Essenes. Jesus taught as a Jew of his time - like the Pharisees. Jesus ate in the homes of the Pharisees. Jesus called his disciples as did the pharisees. etc,.

Jesus **dispute with the Pharisees was limited **to their holding traditions above the commands of God.

The pharisees did not use the Septuagint.

Ginger

 

[Ginger2]

Did Luther accept Papal infallibility, all 7 Sacraments, Purgatory? Did he use the canon that was detemined by the CC…

Yes he did. Until the Pope proved he was not infallible by defending his right to sell entrance into heaven. Once Luther’s faith in the pope was rightly crushed, he began to examine the religion to see if other false teachings existed.

“In our Latin Bible, ‘repent’ has come to mean ‘to do penance.’ But in the original Greek it means ‘to change one’s mind’ — and that is what Jesus meant. Jesus didn’t ask for penance… works, deeds or rituals… he asks for a simple change of heart. Salvation is not earned by pilgrimages to Rome, veneration of relics, or Masses attended. We need only Jesus Christ. Jesus paid for our sins. Salvation is a gift from God.” - Matin Luther

“Faith is a living, bold trust in God’s grace, so certain of God’s favor that it would risk death a thousand times trusting in it. Such confidence and knowledge of God’s grace makes you happy, joyful and bold in your relationship to God and all creatures. The Holy Spirit makes this happen through faith. Because of it, you freely, willingly and joyfully do good to everyone, serve everyone, suffer all kinds of things, love and praise the God who has shown you such grace. Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!” - Martin Luther

This is in contrast to the teaching of the RC:
“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff”(Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam).Pope!!!

"Even if the Pope were Satan incarnate, we ought … calmly lie down to rest on his bosom. …God has commanded that, even if the priests, the pastors, and Christ-on-earth were incarnate devils, we be obedient and subject to them, …” (St. Catherine)

Ginger

 

[JonNC]

In spite of the issues of theology and history betweeen Luther and the Catholic Church, it is important to remember that an extremely key dispute has to some degree been resolved. In short, Catholicism and Lutheranism agree on justification or the means to salvation. My stab at summarizing it is we’re save by grace which is exhibited through faith and good works. Saved by faith alone and once saved always saved and the good works controversy somewhat boils down to semantics, misunderstanding of vocabulary and what is necessarily incorporated into the words and phrases of faith and good works. See the link to the 1999 formalized document of agreement:

JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

Thank you and Bless you Alicia!

The Lutheran churches and the Roman Catholic Church **have together listened **to the good news proclaimed in Holy Scripture. This common listening, together with the theological conversations of recent years, has led to a shared understanding of justification. This encompasses a consensus in the basic truths; the differing explications in particular statements are compatible with it.

15.In faith we together hold the conviction that justification is the work of the triune God. The Father sent his Son into the world to save sinners. The foundation and presupposition of justification is the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. Justification thus means that Christ himself is our righteousness, in which we share through the Holy Spirit in accord with the will of the Father. Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works.[11]

16.All people are called by God to salvation in Christ. Through Christ alone are we justified, when we receive this salvation in faith. Faith is itself God’s gift through the Holy Spirit who works through word and sacrament in the community of believers and who, at the same time, leads believers into that renewal of life which God will bring to completion in eternal life.

17.**We also share **the conviction that the message of justification directs us in a special way towards the heart of the New Testament witness to God’s saving action in Christ: it tells us that as sinners our new life is solely due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God imparts as a gift and we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way.

Jon

 

[SHW]

I’ve already proven Luther did not make changes. Luther did not invent Sola Fida as Catholics define it.

Proof 1. Protestants don’t teach Sola Faith as defined by the RC
Proof 2. Luther said, “Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!” (An Introduction to St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans,)- by Martin Luther
Proof 3. The word “only” you claim Luther added to Scriptures is not found in Protestant Bibles
etc., etc., etc.,…

Since Luther stated in his letter “Let Your Sin’s Be Strong” dated 1 August 1521, that obeying the commandments don’t matter, I would say that this is a change in doctrine:

“It suffices that through God’s glory we have recognized the Lamb who takes away the
sin of the world. No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to
kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.”

iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/letsinsbe.txt

This looks like “faith alone” to me. This looks like OSAS or “eternal security” to me.

Pax,
SHW

 

[JonNC]

Since Luther stated in his letter “Let Your Sin’s Be Strong” dated 1 August 1521, that obeying the commandments don’t matter, I would say that this is a change in doctrine:

“It suffices that through God’s glory we have recognized the Lamb who takes away the
sin of the world. No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to
kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.”

iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/letsinsbe.txt

This looks like “faith alone” to me. This looks like OSAS or “eternal security” to me.

Pax,
SHW

Taken out of context, it would. This quote comes from a letter to Melanchton, and is not some statement of doctrine. In Luther’s hyperbolic way, he is stating the fact that Christ’s sacrifice is stronger by far than any sin we commit. Both he and Melanchton knew and believed in the importance of confession, and contrition, and trying to follow the 10 commandments. They both knew that even the regenerate can lose faith, that repeated, unrepented sin can drive out the Holy Spirit. Writings by both men in the confessional documents attest to this. www.bookofconcord.org

If I were to take my signature statement from Cr. Ratzinger out of context, I could claim he was stating that he believed that Lutheran orders and sacraments are equal to that of Catholics. But I make no such claim because I know he doesn’t believe that. It is from a letter to a German Lutheran Bishop, and was not meant as a doctrinal statement. The context is the dialogue between Lutherans and Catholics about how we view the church and its ministry, and the growing commonality between us. And I think it is a wonderful, promising statement.

Jon

 

[josie_L]

Which is obvious from Proof 2

Please, can you tell us how the CC defines the SS, or better yet how the CC defines what is Truth and/or how to attain/derive Truth? Then, once you’ve answered this question you will know the difference between Luther and the CC concerning this issue.

 

[josie_L]

Thank you and Bless you Alicia!

Jon

Jon, this is what I have found:

This spiritual quality incorporates us in Christ as his very members (1 Cor. 6:15), makes us live by him as the branches exist by the very life of the vine to which they belong (John 15:5), and through him enables us to become in a mysterious way sharers in the divine nature itself (2 Pet. 1:4).

The goodness, justice, righteousness, or holiness of a soul in a state of grace is, therefore, a reality and not merely a fiction. It is imparted to the soul by God, sanctifying it in its very nature. It is not merely imputed to the soul by God, leaving the soul still contaminated by the filth of sin.

This ennobling and consoling doctrine, the true teaching of the New Testament, Luther altogether rejected. Concentrating on the one text of Romans 1:16-17, and on others which he thought he could fit in with it, he overlooked all other.aspects of Christian doctrine taught elsewhere in the New Testament. He declared . that the Greek word used by Paul for righteousness (dikaiosune) means simply “acquitted,” as one is acquitted or declared not guilty in a court of law. Such a decree, he said, makes no change in the acquitted person. He remains exactly as he was before. He is merely told that the law does not regard him as a criminal.

Therefore, according to Paul, argued Martin Luther, man’s justification means that he is reputed or accounted as righteous in the sight of God, although he remains as sinful in his very nature as ever. The change is in God’s disposition toward man, not in man himself. Henceforth God looks upon him with favor instead of disfavor, attributing to him the righteousness of Christ which is in no way really possessed within the soul."

Now Jon wouldn’t you say that what Luther taught on justification was different from its Catholic counterpart.

 

[JonNC]

Jon, this is what I have found:

This spiritual quality incorporates us in Christ as his very members (1 Cor. 6:15), makes us live by him as the branches exist by the very life of the vine to which they belong (John 15:5), and through him enables us to become in a mysterious way sharers in the divine nature itself (2 Pet. 1:4).

The goodness, justice, righteousness, or holiness of a soul in a state of grace is, therefore, a reality and not merely a fiction. It is imparted to the soul by God, sanctifying it in its very nature. It is not merely imputed to the soul by God, leaving the soul still contaminated by the filth of sin.

This ennobling and consoling doctrine, the true teaching of the New Testament, Luther altogether rejected. Concentrating on the one text of Romans 1:16-17, and on others which he thought he could fit in with it, he overlooked all other.aspects of Christian doctrine taught elsewhere in the New Testament. He declared . that the Greek word used by Paul for righteousness (dikaiosune) means simply “acquitted,” as one is acquitted or declared not guilty in a court of law. Such a decree, he said, makes no change in the acquitted person. He remains exactly as he was before. He is merely told that the law does not regard him as a criminal.

Therefore, according to Paul, argued Martin Luther, man’s justification means that he is reputed or accounted as righteous in the sight of God, although he remains as sinful in his very nature as ever. The change is in God’s disposition toward man, not in man himself. Henceforth God looks upon him with favor instead of disfavor, attributing to him the righteousness of Christ which is in no way really possessed within the soul."

Now Jon wouldn’t you say that what Luther taught on justification was different from its Catholic counterpart.

Josie,
What is the source, so I can view it? But in short, the differing expressions used by our communions to describe grace and justification need to be reconciled, and I believe can be, as proven by the JDDJ. We can all look backwards and continue to throw polemics at each other, or we can look forward with a desire that the HS guide our communions together. Seems to me that our respective leaders are further along this road than many of us in the laity of both.

Jon

 

[Ginger2]

Since Luther stated in his letter “Let Your Sin’s Be Strong” dated 1 August 1521, that obeying the commandments don’t matter, I would say that this is a change in doctrine:

Luther didn’t say the commandments don’t matter. He used hyperbole to make a point - that no sin or number of sins is too great or to numerous for God to forgive. If you had read the entire statement you would know that.

“Sin remains in the spiritual man for the exercise of grace, the humbling of pride, and the repression of presumption. For he who is not busily at work driving out sin without a doubt has sin by the very fact of this neglect, even though he has committed no further sin for which he may be damned. For we are not called to idleness; we are called to labor against our passions. These would not be without guilt—for they are truly sins, indeed damnable ones — if the mercy of God did not forego imputing them to us. But He does not impute them to those only who manfully undertake the struggle with their failings and, calling upon the grace of God, fight it through. Therefore he who goes to confession should not fancy that he is laying down burdens in order to live a life of ease. On the contrary, he should know that by laying down the burden he is undertaking to serve as a soldier of God and is taking a different burden upon himself, the burden of battling for God against the devil and his own failings. The man who does not know this will suffer a quick relapse. Therefore he who does not intend henceforth to fight—why does he ask to be absolved and to be enrolled in the army of Christ?”

You can see clearly that Luther is refuting an false idea some had that if they go to confession they don’t need to keep the commandments. This is in line with true RC teaching. Confession is not a free pass to sin.

This looks like “faith alone” to me. This looks like OSAS or “eternal security” to me.

Pax,
SHW

Hopefully the excerpt above has cleared up your confusion.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

And I don’t disagree with that. The fact that they CAN harmonize just about everything is what scares the hell out of me and should as well other Christians.

ICA04,

If we “scare the hell out of you,” why are you in here? I notice under your name it says, “trial membership” with CAF. Are you curious about Catholicism or trying to convert folks out of it? What is your purpose in sharing a forum with people like us that terrify you? I wouldn’t go on a liberal Episcopalian forum or a Mormon forum because some of their theology spooks me bigtime. Your statement is degrading to Catholics and we terrify you. Yet you keep coming to a Catholic forum? I must be missing something?..or maybe you have a part of you that is curious and searching for Catholic truth?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Today at Mass we sang, “A Mighty Fortress is our God.” Brother Martin must be smiling somewhere knowing we Roman Catholics are singin’ his tune!

 

[JonNC]

Today at Mass we sang, “A Mighty Fortress is our God.” Brother Martin must be smiling somewhere knowing we Roman Catholics are singin’ his tune!

Yes, he would. And we still use (most of) your mass. I think sharing with each other will do more than shouting at each other.
Tell your priest how happy this Lutheran was that he did that.

Jon

 

[jean8]

As a past protestant who went to Liberty University to become a pastor, I found my way to the catholic church. After learning the languages of the original texts, the history of the times of the bible, and the fathers of the church I was amazed to find that protestant interpretation was far from actual meaning. If I where to tell you to stay cool, would you know what I meant? this is a bad comparison but you should get the point! The poeple of the church is not perfect but the church itself is! You use the Bible against Catholics even though it was catholics who wrote the Bible! even Luther says we have the catholic church to thank for that himself! If you really want to play high and mighty than you can do it with me! Let us debate these matters of biblical opinions, but since english is so far off from the original languages, lets debate in hebrew, greek, or latin! I will let you choose which one! I will also pray for you! God Bless!

jake,
You know very well not many folks know Latin or Greek. Don’t go there.
This isn’t a seminary setting.
Many folks do know the Bible. Interpretation is another matter, but we have the Holy Spirit to guide us , not the magisterium. (man)
“God has limited our intelligence, but not our stupidity.”
About Luther? Shall we then discuss the morality of the Popes from the past.
Lets stay focused on today. We can’t change yesterday.

God bless,
jean8

 

[kalt]

Yes he did. Until the Pope proved he was not infallible by defending his right to sell entrance into heaven. Once Luther’s faith in the pope was rightly crushed, he began to examine the religion to see if other false teachings existed.

“In our Latin Bible, ‘repent’ has come to mean ‘to do penance.’ But in the original Greek it means ‘to change one’s mind’ — and that is what Jesus meant. Jesus didn’t ask for penance… works, deeds or rituals… he asks for a simple change of heart. Salvation is not earned by pilgrimages to Rome, veneration of relics, or Masses attended. We need only Jesus Christ. Jesus paid for our sins. Salvation is a gift from God.” - Matin Luther

“Faith is a living, bold trust in God’s grace, so certain of God’s favor that it would risk death a thousand times trusting in it. Such confidence and knowledge of God’s grace makes you happy, joyful and bold in your relationship to God and all creatures. The Holy Spirit makes this happen through faith. Because of it, you freely, willingly and joyfully do good to everyone, serve everyone, suffer all kinds of things, love and praise the God who has shown you such grace. Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!” - Martin Luther

This is in contrast to the teaching of the RC:
“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff”(Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam).Pope!!!

"Even if the Pope were Satan incarnate, we ought … calmly lie down to rest on his bosom. …God has commanded that, even if the priests, the pastors, and Christ-on-earth were incarnate devils, we be obedient and subject to them, …” (St. Catherine)

Ginger

I read no further than your first sentence.

We agree. Luther did change things.

Case closed.

 

[kalt]

I believe that Luther changed doctrine and the Bible of his own accord.

That is where my problem w/ Luther begins and ends. That he was a nut is obvious. That he was right on some counts is also obvious.

He had a brilliant mind. The CC owes a lot to him.

Still, he changed doctrine and the Bible without authority.

Some here are complaining that he was an anti-semite and otherwise a miserable human being. That is irrelevant. Some of the popes have been miserable human beings, too. The CC doesn’t get its authority from itself (from the men who run it), and so it doesn’t depend on the righteousness of its popes.

Luther, however, made changes without authority and without the protection of infallibility.

He shouldn’t have made the changes he did, and that he did not speak infallibly means that no one can know that the doctrines he promoted are correct. He said so himself, didn’t he, when he denied papal infallibility.

He argues against reason, yet expects others to follow him because he has reasoned out a doctrine that suits his fancy.

 

[SHW]

Taken out of context, it would. This quote comes from a letter to Melanchton, and is not some statement of doctrine. In Luther’s hyperbolic way, he is stating the fact that Christ’s sacrifice is stronger by far than any sin we commit. Both he and Melanchton knew and believed in the importance of confession, and contrition, and trying to follow the 10 commandments. They both knew that even the regenerate can lose faith, that repeated, unrepented sin can drive out the Holy Spirit. Writings by both men in the confessional documents attest to this. www.bookofconcord.org

If I were to take my signature statement from Cr. Ratzinger out of context, I could claim he was stating that he believed that Lutheran orders and sacraments are equal to that of Catholics. But I make no such claim because I know he doesn’t believe that. It is from a letter to a German Lutheran Bishop, and was not meant as a doctrinal statement. The context is the dialogue between Lutherans and Catholics about how we view the church and its ministry, and the growing commonality between us. And I think it is a wonderful, promising statement.

Jon

Thank you for the clarification. I, too, am pleased with ecumenism. However, I do think this was a very dangerous thing to say, even for hyperbolic reasons, since just one sin of adultery will forfeit a person’s justification.

Ephesians 5:3-7 “But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; 4 neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. 5 For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. 6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. 7 Therefore do not be partakers with them.”

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Galatians 5:19-21 “Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

Pax,
SHW

 

[JonNC]

Thank you for the clarification. I, too, am pleased with ecumenism. However, I do think this was a very dangerous thing to say, even for hyperbolic reasons, since just one sin of adultery will forfeit a person’s justification.

Ephesians 5:3-7 “But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; 4 neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. 5 For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. 6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. 7 Therefore do not be partakers with them.”

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Galatians 5:19-21 “Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

Pax,
SHW

Yeah, maybe so. But, of course, when you or I write personal letters we may not expect it to go public, so to speak. Luther knew he was speaking to a theologian like himself, who would not mistake the hyperbole for something, as you said, dangerous.

Finally, may I add to the end of your last sentence above, “since just one sin of adultery will forfeit a person’s justification” the words, “if it remains unrepented of”.

Jon

 

[SHW]

Yeah, maybe so. But, of course, when you or I write personal letters we may not expect it to go public, so to speak. Luther knew he was speaking to a theologian like himself, who would not mistake the hyperbole for something, as you said, dangerous.

Finally, may I add to the end of your last sentence above, “since just one sin of adultery will forfeit a person’s justification” the words, “if it remains unrepented of”.

Jon

I totally agree with you. How’s that for ecumenism?

Pax,
SHW

 

[w_stewart]

Ginger,
I might add also that sola scriptura as often defined here by Catholics, is not what Luther taught or believed.

Jon

We have to agree also that the teaching of Sola Scriptura by Luther is in effect reducing the authority of the Church, thereby, crippling her to some extent.