Should Catholics Praise Martin Luther???

  • Thread starter Thread starter lethalbean95
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
After all the years I have been involved with this dialogue…which has been ongoing for 50 years…I think it is perfectly wonderful.
I just hope we Lutherans hold up our end - the secular world is doing it’s best to crush us.

We subvert our own scripture, we don’t hold on to those that God has gathered for us, and we don’t teach our own children as we are commanded to.



Even if our two traditions never come to full communion with each other, I’m happy that we can call each other to repent and call each other to be strong in this world.
 
Luther ‘contributed in a substantial way to the radical change in the ecclesiastical and secular reality in the West.’ That is a fact. There was a radical change and Luther contributed. It is also a fact Luther was profoundly religious. None of those statements are surprising if taken in the most straightforward way. It is even possible that Luther did and said some good things. We don’t need Luther to be be the anti-Christ in every way for Catholicism to be true.

From a practical standpoint you probably won’t win a lot of Protestants to the faith by running down their founders. That isn’t to say you can’t dispute their teachings vigorously.
What’s next, a papal statement praising Henry VIII?
There is one for when he was granted the title Defender of the Faith and that for impugning Lutheranism. Of course he didn’t maintain it once he broke from the Church. But like Luther Henry did some good. Their lives just show the importance of preserving until the end.
 
Hi guys hows it going. I was reading today about John Paul II and his dialouge with other denominations/religions and I came across an article that kind of left me confused. Now Im not sure how reliable it is, but if what if said is true, can someone explain to me what the Pope is talking about. Heres the link to the article nytimes.com/1983/11/06/world/pope-praises-luther-in-an-appeal-for-unity-on-protest-anniversary.html

The article states that hes said certain things about Luther such as ‘‘contributed in a substantial way to the radical change in the ecclesiastical and secular reality in the West.’’ And other things such as ‘‘Our world still experiences his GREAT IMPACT on history.’’ and that Luther was a man of ‘‘PROFOUND religiousness’’ who was ‘‘DRIVEN by the examination of eternal salvation.’’

What are we to make of this? I think most Catholics would disagree that Luther left a “GREAT IMPACT” on the world and history. I think they would blame him and the reformation for the shattering of Christendom. So should we praise Martin Luther for what had happened?

EWTN seems to confirm the meeting. But I dont know how reliable are the statements said in the NY TIMES post. ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP831211.HTM
Exactly. JP II, Benedict, Francis all have a very respectful attitude to Luther that many “on the ground” Catholics completely overlook/reject. As a revert Catholic I find this puzzling. Catholic Luther scholarship played a role in Vatican II - that whole generation of Roman Catholic clerics. A huge role. Many Protestant scholars returned the favor in the 20th century, studying and giving high praise to the Church Fathers of tradition in the Catholic Church (Luther had profound unquestioning respect for the Church Fathers. It would have never occurred to him to be capable of thinking of them in any other way; his mind and teaching was formed by and reflects them.) On the scholarship level at the high echelons of Catholic and mainstream Protestant Churches, this very fruitful dialogue continues today.

When I see this anti-Luther stuff on Catholic Answers or hear it from Catholics in person (quite rare actually) I am really shocked. I just assume it is a lack of awareness of above - a disconnect. Also I would gently add that a lot of Evangelical Protestants, either in their own Churches or converts to Catholicism, don’t actually know anything about Luther, but the dirt they get online. He forms an invaluable bridge between Catholics and Evangelicals. Lutherans are NOT Evangelicals. In short, many Protestants often don’t know their own Protestant history, and how that history connects to Catholic history.
 
We should recognize his good points and his desire to see the Church follow the Bible.
 
In the upcoming 500th anniversary of the Protestant Revolt, Catholics should pray and offer sacrifices in atonement for the corruption in the Church that led to Luther’s schism and the division of Christendom. If the Church had been less infected with corruption and scandal then perhaps the Protestant Revolt would not have happened.

That said, Luther was a very bad man. Aside from denying key aspects of Christian theology and substituting his own, deceptively adding the word “alone” after “faith” in Romans in his version of the Bible to deceive literally millions of people about the Word of God; excising 7 books from Sacred Scripture, denying the efficacy of 5 of the 7 sacraments, and declaring the Church to be the Whore of Babylon and the Popes to be Antichrists, consider his proposal for dealing with the Jews:

From Luther’s 1543 book On the Jews and Their Lies, wherein he proposes a form of the Final Solution.
  1. “First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians.”
2.“Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them the fact that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.”

3.“Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.”

4.“Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb.”

5.“Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let them stay at home.”

6.“Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, they have no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they have stolen and robbed from us an they possess. …] Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest. With this he could set himself up in some occupation for the support of his poor wife and children, and the maintenance of the old or feeble.”

7.“Seventh, I recommend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen. 3 :19]). For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting., and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.”

In other words, burn down all the synagogues, burn down the houses of the Jews, deprive the Jews of their employment (and take all their money for “safekeeping”), and kill their rabbis and any Jews who leave home. Since the Jews weren’t going to simply stop practicing their religion, Luther’s proposal would require murdering an endless series of rabbis and their successors.
 
Protestantism would have occurred no matter what. The Medieval culture, with the Church and the kingdoms sharing the top, was coming to an end. Had there been no Luther, there would still have been an English Reformation, and no doubt many others.

I still am confused why the Church must “praise” adversaries just because they were influential on history. Are documents praising the Eastern leadership of 1054 in the works? Nietzsche? Lenin?

But what have I to say, I’m just a sinner.

ICXC NIKA
 
Protestantism would have occurred no matter what. The Medieval culture, with the Church and the kingdoms sharing the top, was coming to an end. Had there been no Luther, there would still have been an English Reformation, and no doubt many others.

I still am confused why the Church must “praise” adversaries just because they were influential on history. Are documents praising the Eastern leadership of 1054 in the works? Nietzsche? Lenin?

But what have I to say, I’m just a sinner.

ICXC NIKA
I personally don’t see any grounds whatsoever to praise Martin Luther, but I do think we have to be very careful not to paint our Lutheran brothers and sisters in Christ with Luther’s sins. For the most part, they were born into Lutheranism and raised in Lutheran Churches (Lutheranism has very, very few converts). They are not guilty of the sin of schism. And again, corruption and scandal in the Church (both then and now) help to keep us separated.

Nevertheless, we should not ignore statements such as these:

“If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham” (ref. Grisar, “Luther”, Vol. V. pg. 413).

“The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows seven times higher than ordinary thieves.” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 53, Pg. 502).

“To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” – “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs” (ref. Erlangen Vol 24, Pg. 294).

“If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.” (ref. Of Married Life).

“Suppose I should counsel the wife of an impotent man, with his consent, to giver herself to another, say her husband’s brother, but to keep this marriage secret and to ascribe the children to the so-called putative father. The question is: Is such a women in a saved state? I answer, certainly.” (ref. On Marriage).

“What harm could it do if a man told a good lusty lie in a worthy cause and for the sake of the Christian Churches?” (ref. Lenz: Briefwechsel, Vol. 1. Pg. 373).

"To lie in a case of necessity or for convenience or in excuse – such lying would not be against God; He was ready to take such lies on Himself” (ref. Lenz: Briefwechsel, Vol. 1. Pg. 375).

“We must remove the Decalogue out of sight and heart” (ref. De Wette 4, 188)

“If we allow them – the Commandments – any influence in our conscience, they become the cloak of all evil, heresies and blasphemies” (ref. Comm. ad Galat, p.310).
 
Luther ‘contributed in a substantial way to the radical change in the ecclesiastical and secular reality in the West.’ That is a fact. There was a radical change and Luther contributed. It is also a fact Luther was profoundly religious. None of those statements are surprising if taken in the most straightforward way. It is even possible that Luther did and said some good things. We don’t need Luther to be be the anti-Christ in every way for Catholicism to be true.

From a practical standpoint you probably won’t win a lot of Protestants to the faith by running down their founders. That isn’t to say you can’t dispute their teachings vigorously.

There is one for when he was granted the title Defender of the Faith and that for impugning Lutheranism. Of course he didn’t maintain it once he broke from the Church. But like Luther Henry did some good. Their lives just show the importance of preserving until the end.
Henry got the Defensor Fidei title for a couple of reasons, one indeed likely being the Assertio Septem Sacramentorum , one being some past history when Henry had been useful to the Papacy, and one being that he had been importuning Rome for a title like that for around 6 years, to go with his Christianissimus. Persistent, was Hank.
 
I personally don’t see any grounds whatsoever to praise Martin Luther, but I do think we have to be very careful not to paint our Lutheran brothers and sisters in Christ with Luther’s sins. For the most part, they were born into Lutheranism and raised in Lutheran Churches (Lutheranism has very, very few converts). They are not guilty of the sin of schism. And again, corruption and scandal in the Church (both then and now) help to keep us separated.

Nevertheless, we should not ignore statements such as these:

“If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham” (ref. Grisar, “Luther”, Vol. V. pg. 413).

“The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows seven times higher than ordinary thieves.” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 53, Pg. 502).

“To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” – “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs” (ref. Erlangen Vol 24, Pg. 294).

“If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.” (ref. Of Married Life).

“Suppose I should counsel the wife of an impotent man, with his consent, to giver herself to another, say her husband’s brother, but to keep this marriage secret and to ascribe the children to the so-called putative father. The question is: Is such a women in a saved state? I answer, certainly.” (ref. On Marriage).

“What harm could it do if a man told a good lusty lie in a worthy cause and for the sake of the Christian Churches?” (ref. Lenz: Briefwechsel, Vol. 1. Pg. 373).

"To lie in a case of necessity or for convenience or in excuse – such lying would not be against God; He was ready to take such lies on Himself” (ref. Lenz: Briefwechsel, Vol. 1. Pg. 375).

“We must remove the Decalogue out of sight and heart” (ref. De Wette 4, 188)

“If we allow them – the Commandments – any influence in our conscience, they become the cloak of all evil, heresies and blasphemies” (ref. Comm. ad Galat, p.310).
You do realize of course Lutherans can find lots of quotes from Medieval Popes who said some pretty off the wall things too, right?
 
You do realize of course Lutherans can find lots of quotes from Medieval Popes who said some pretty off the wall things too, right?
Indeed. As with Yogi Berra, are we certain that ML in fact said “all the things he said”??

ICXC NIKA
 
Funny though. 😃

Lutheran: Let’s not talk about it.

Catholic: We haven’t enough of it.
 
Hi guys hows it going. I was reading today about John Paul II and his dialouge with other denominations/religions and I came across an article that kind of left me confused. Now Im not sure how reliable it is, but if what if said is true, can someone explain to me what the Pope is talking about. Heres the link to the article nytimes.com/1983/11/06/world/pope-praises-luther-in-an-appeal-for-unity-on-protest-anniversary.html

The article states that hes said certain things about Luther such as ‘‘contributed in a substantial way to the radical change in the ecclesiastical and secular reality in the West.’’ And other things such as ‘‘Our world still experiences his GREAT IMPACT on history.’’ and that Luther was a man of ‘‘PROFOUND religiousness’’ who was ‘‘DRIVEN by the examination of eternal salvation.’’

What are we to make of this? I think most Catholics would disagree that Luther left a “GREAT IMPACT” on the world and history. I think they would blame him and the reformation for the shattering of Christendom. So should we praise Martin Luther for what had happened?

EWTN seems to confirm the meeting. But I dont know how reliable are the statements said in the NY TIMES post. ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP831211.HTM
No we should not. He divided Christianity more than it ever was.
 
The article states that hes said certain things about Luther such as ‘‘contributed in a substantial way to the radical change in the ecclesiastical and secular reality in the West.’’ And other things such as ‘‘Our world still experiences his GREAT IMPACT on history.’’ and that Luther was a man of ‘‘PROFOUND religiousness’’ who was ‘‘DRIVEN by the examination of eternal salvation.’’
Hi and thanks for posting that.

I’m a bit curious what the SSPX has said about it, but I haven’t gone looking. Anyhow, it seems safe to say that the RCC isn’t as monolithic as some people think.
 
Catholics have no more cause for praising Martin Luther than Lutherans would have cause for praising Pope Leo X. We are indeed separated brethren and as tragic as it is, it is a reality. There are Lutherans( believe it or not) who hold Pope Leo X as being the man responsible for fracturing the Church when all Luther wanted was a Council and resolution to the issues he saw as troubling ( judging by the presence of the other reformers, apparently he wasn’t the only one who thought so, although he got the most press)
pbs.org/empires/martinluther/char_leo.html
history.com/topics/reformation
greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/john-hus.html
christian-history.org/martin-luther.html.
 
Catholics have no more cause for praising Martin Luther than Lutherans would have cause for praising Pope Leo X. We are indeed separated brethren and as tragic as it is, it is a reality. There are Lutherans( believe it or not) who hold Pope Leo X as being the man responsible for fracturing the Church when all Luther wanted was a Council and resolution to the issues he saw as troubling ( judging by the presence of the other reformers, apparently he wasn’t the only one who thought so, although he got the most press)
pbs.org/empires/martinluther/char_leo.html
history.com/topics/reformation
greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/john-hus.html
christian-history.org/martin-luther.html.
The seven capital sins can be found in everyone, whether they be pope or peasant. By throwing rocks at one another we just bruise one another and get nowhere.

May our Lord Jesus Christ lead us all to the fullness of His Truth and Love.

Peace,

Dorothy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top