=Topper17;13025685]Here Jon, I will allow your own words to answer your question:
Would you represent your comment about my supposed “bashing” of Luther and your comment that my posts are “laughable” as ‘encouragement’ with regard to the information that I post about Luther? What is the intent of your comments if not to discourage?
My intent is clearly to dispute them. It would be impossible for me to do so if you did not have the freedom to express them. I will defend your right to express your views. It is the progressives who wish to limit speech to only what they believe in, as evidenced by by college campuses today. To say that my intent to dispute is really an attempt to discourage is also a progressive tactic.
You are quite correct in one limited respect though about the recent honesty of Lutheran Scholars. They have, over the last few decades have become MUCH more honest about the Real Martin Luther. As you point out, I have quoted them here on CA extensively.
Then, it seems contradictory your constant complaint that, somehow, Lutherans have been able to keep perhaps one of the most prolific writers of his era under wraps.
However, the honesty of recent Lutheran Scholars on the matter only points to the lack thereof of their predecessors and is in contrast to non-professional, non-clerical Lutheran commenters. What I find refreshing about these professional Lutheran Scholars is that they have found a way to honestly represent Luther and his numerous crazy teachings, and STILL remain within the Lutheran fold. I do have to tell you though that it seems to me that, overall, I get the impression that these modern honest Lutheran Scholars are not as concerned about matters of doctrine as have been their predecessors.
As numerous Lutherans have tried countless times to inform you, Lutherans are not Lutheran because of Luther. Sometimes we are Lutheran despite him. Lutheranism has as its center Messiah, the Christ, and Him crucified.
Furthermore, as has been evidenced by many posters here, with Eric being only the latest, Lutheran laypeople tend to know almost NONE of the more embarrassing details and teachings of the man whose name they bear. And again, with Eric as an example, when they learn those details, they are likely to begin questioning the teachings of the man in general, and become more likely ‘swimmers’.
If Eric or others wish to leave Lutheranism over Luther’s flaws, I only encourage them to land in a communion which values and provides both word and sacrament.
OTOH, they must remember that if one leaves their communion because of the actions of the flawed human leaders, they will most certainly land in a communion with equally flawed leaders. People have left the CC because of the recent scandals involving priests and perhaps some bishops. I think this is the wrong reason for leaving the CC. Neither the Catholic nor Lutheran churches are marked by the flaws of their leaders, but instead
bear the mark of the crucified.
If you would like Jon, when I get back home I can do a quick search through the indexes of all of the books I have on the Holocaust, noting especially the ones written by Lutheran Scholars. I can report back on the number of references to Eck and the number of references to Luther. I would be happy to do this for you since I think it would demonstrate, for you, the modern IMPACT of Luther’s actions and recommendations, as opposed to those of Eck, at least in the minds of modern Scholars, including especially the Lutherans.
Neither Eck nor Luther’s writings about the Jews are in any way ‘admirable’ Jon, but you know for a fact that Eck’s negative satements about the Jews are not even in the same universe as the recommendations that Luther made as to what should physically happen to the Jews. As you know, Luther made 7 astonishingly horrific recommendations as to what he wanted to happen, physically, to the Jews. Eck on the other hand, SAID some nasty things about the Jews but made NO such recommendations. Thus, in terms of INTENT, there is NO COMPARISION. Luther made it very clear that the INTENT of his recommendations was that the Jews be harmed, as a people and as individuals.
Yes, I had forgotten the contest angle of this one. You know quite well that I spend no time defending Luther’s anti-Jewish rants. If you think Eck deserves a pass because he, in your view, and based on the decisions of a 20th century madman, was worse, well I won’t stand in your way.
I think it is significant that so many people have come to CA and explained that they were forced to reconsider their membership in their Lutheran communions after reading about the Martin Luther that they had never known and reading the writings that they had never been exposed to.
Do you think Catholics showed leave the Catholic Church because of the recent scandals? I understand the effects on the victims, but other than that, I think it isn’t a good reason to do so.
Jon
.
