D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
Decidedly not…
- Status
R
Randolph
Guest
Don Ruggero… Nice try, but no cigars…
What Pope John Paul did was a wonderful and a great thing for the Church. He asked for forgiveness for anti-Semitic acts that sons and daughters of the Church committed against Jews in the past. This great pope set a great example for all Catholics to follow. Anti-semittism in the Church existed prior to Luther and still existed to this day. But this does not negate the fact that Luther himself was a heretic, a raging anti-Semite, and a revolutionary who wanted to destroy the Catholic Church.
For the past 500 years, Luther’s abhorrent anti-Semitic writings have been the source of hatred and violence against Jews in Germany and throughout Europe. A quick review of history will teach you the horrendous impacts of what Martin Luther’s hatred:
—Hitler’s Education Minister, Bernhard Rust, was quoted by the Völkischer Beobachter as saying that: “Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance … I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]”
—Hans Hinkel, leader of the Luther League’s magazine Deutsche Kultur-Wacht, and of the Berlin chapter of the Kampfbund, paid tribute to Luther in his acceptance speech as head of both the Jewish section and the film department of Goebbel’s Chamber of Culture and Propaganda Ministry. “Through his acts and his spiritual attitude, he began the fight which we will wage today; with Luther, the revolution of German blood and feeling against alien elements of the Volk was begun. To continue and complete his Protestantism, nationalism must make the picture of Luther, of a German fighter, live as an example ‘above the barriers of confession’ for all German blood comrades.”[60]
—According to Daniel Goldhagen, Bishop Martin Sasse, a leading Protestant churchman, published a compendium of Luther’s writings shortly after Kristallnacht, for which Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church in the University of Oxford argued that Luther’s writing was a “blueprint”.[34] Sasse "applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day, writing in the introduction, “On November 10, 1938, on Luther’s birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany.” The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words “of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews.”
—and much, much more…
Frankly, and quite sadly, conveniently ignoring all of the nasty things that Martin Luther himself did (never repented) is quite tragic. Hatred, violence and brutality are wrong anywhere and everywhere. I see no good things that would come ever out of it.
Ecumenical dialogue can only be fruitful if it’s based on Christ and in truth. The use of selective facts and judgements to advance certain political agenda within the Church are simply dishonest, unfruitful and quite frankly dangerous…
What Pope John Paul did was a wonderful and a great thing for the Church. He asked for forgiveness for anti-Semitic acts that sons and daughters of the Church committed against Jews in the past. This great pope set a great example for all Catholics to follow. Anti-semittism in the Church existed prior to Luther and still existed to this day. But this does not negate the fact that Luther himself was a heretic, a raging anti-Semite, and a revolutionary who wanted to destroy the Catholic Church.
For the past 500 years, Luther’s abhorrent anti-Semitic writings have been the source of hatred and violence against Jews in Germany and throughout Europe. A quick review of history will teach you the horrendous impacts of what Martin Luther’s hatred:
—Hitler’s Education Minister, Bernhard Rust, was quoted by the Völkischer Beobachter as saying that: “Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance … I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]”
—Hans Hinkel, leader of the Luther League’s magazine Deutsche Kultur-Wacht, and of the Berlin chapter of the Kampfbund, paid tribute to Luther in his acceptance speech as head of both the Jewish section and the film department of Goebbel’s Chamber of Culture and Propaganda Ministry. “Through his acts and his spiritual attitude, he began the fight which we will wage today; with Luther, the revolution of German blood and feeling against alien elements of the Volk was begun. To continue and complete his Protestantism, nationalism must make the picture of Luther, of a German fighter, live as an example ‘above the barriers of confession’ for all German blood comrades.”[60]
—According to Daniel Goldhagen, Bishop Martin Sasse, a leading Protestant churchman, published a compendium of Luther’s writings shortly after Kristallnacht, for which Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church in the University of Oxford argued that Luther’s writing was a “blueprint”.[34] Sasse "applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day, writing in the introduction, “On November 10, 1938, on Luther’s birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany.” The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words “of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews.”
—and much, much more…
Frankly, and quite sadly, conveniently ignoring all of the nasty things that Martin Luther himself did (never repented) is quite tragic. Hatred, violence and brutality are wrong anywhere and everywhere. I see no good things that would come ever out of it.
Ecumenical dialogue can only be fruitful if it’s based on Christ and in truth. The use of selective facts and judgements to advance certain political agenda within the Church are simply dishonest, unfruitful and quite frankly dangerous…
Last edited:
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
You should be very very cautious to which European of my generation you use the words “anti-semite symphatiser” when you do not know their family history, particularly in the last war. It is an argument you can lose…and in a very very bad way.
As for Martin Luther, the decisions that have been made are made by Popes and by the hierarchy. There is no appeal. The laity are not asked for their (name removed by moderator)ut or for their consent. The matter is presented to them as a fait accompli.
How about Otto Herman Pesch?
_“Finally, how do I justify labeling the recent Roman magisterial image of Luther as a prophet rather than merely a reformer or a teacher?… In our time when apologists for doctrine are needed increasingly, Martin Luther can be best described to Catholics as an authentic prophet whose fundamental work was highlighting the gospel that had become eclipsed by the church authorized to proclaim in. Like men described in the Old Testament, Luther was eccentric yet brilliant, banal yet prayerful, unsystematic yet focused. As earlier prophets had urged the recovery of Mosaic traditions within events that encapsulated their lives, so Luther’s life provided novel expressions of faith that purified Catholic tradition even as it promoted disruption among Christians.
_
_“Finally, how do I justify labeling the recent Roman magisterial image of Luther as a prophet rather than merely a reformer or a teacher?… In our time when apologists for doctrine are needed increasingly, Martin Luther can be best described to Catholics as an authentic prophet whose fundamental work was highlighting the gospel that had become eclipsed by the church authorized to proclaim in. Like men described in the Old Testament, Luther was eccentric yet brilliant, banal yet prayerful, unsystematic yet focused. As earlier prophets had urged the recovery of Mosaic traditions within events that encapsulated their lives, so Luther’s life provided novel expressions of faith that purified Catholic tradition even as it promoted disruption among Christians.
_
R
Randolph
Guest
Again, nice try, but still no cigars…
It’s a great thing to establish a healthy dialogue with the Lutherans. This is what the Church must do to heal and to evangelize. Who can dispute that?? But to expect fruitful outcomes from this type of ecumenical dialogues, it must be based on sincerity, honesty and most importantly on Christ.
Popes John Paul and Benedict have done great things to advance this dialogue. But none of the recent popes has ever denied the fact that Martin Luther was in fact an unrepented heretic, an anti-Semite and a revolutionary who wanted to destroy the Catholic Church—the bride of Christ. Furthermore, no popes, or anyone, can ever undo what Martin Luther himself did!!!
Of course, Catholics must be loving, forgiving and merciful as Christ Himself has shown. We must also move on. But Martin Luther’s actions and beliefs were so toxic, dangerous and devastating that they can not be swept aside, or conveniently ignored, for the sake of good natureness, or for not wanting to offend somebody. Remember Martin Luther never repented for his heretical beliefs.
Just think of the countless number of souls lost, Think of the Jews who suffered so greatly and so devastatingly. Think of innocent people that were killed in the ensuing wars after the fracture of Christendom resulted from the Reformation…
It’s a great thing to establish a healthy dialogue with the Lutherans. This is what the Church must do to heal and to evangelize. Who can dispute that?? But to expect fruitful outcomes from this type of ecumenical dialogues, it must be based on sincerity, honesty and most importantly on Christ.
Popes John Paul and Benedict have done great things to advance this dialogue. But none of the recent popes has ever denied the fact that Martin Luther was in fact an unrepented heretic, an anti-Semite and a revolutionary who wanted to destroy the Catholic Church—the bride of Christ. Furthermore, no popes, or anyone, can ever undo what Martin Luther himself did!!!
Of course, Catholics must be loving, forgiving and merciful as Christ Himself has shown. We must also move on. But Martin Luther’s actions and beliefs were so toxic, dangerous and devastating that they can not be swept aside, or conveniently ignored, for the sake of good natureness, or for not wanting to offend somebody. Remember Martin Luther never repented for his heretical beliefs.
Just think of the countless number of souls lost, Think of the Jews who suffered so greatly and so devastatingly. Think of innocent people that were killed in the ensuing wars after the fracture of Christendom resulted from the Reformation…
Last edited:
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
I think, rather, of the countless souls who have been saved.
Just as, with the Pope and our hierarchy, I “receive all that was positive and legitimate in the Reformation”.
R
rcwitness
Guest
Then why did he establish a Communion divided from the Bishop of Rome?
R
rcwitness
Guest
On January 3, 1521, Pope Leo X issued the papal bull Decet Romanum pontificem (“It pleases the Roman Pontiff”), which excommunicated Martin Luther, a German theologian and monk who had been causing the Roman Catholic Church no end of trouble since 1517. With that, the Pope cast Luther out of the Catholic Church—and thereby helped spur the development of the Lutheran church and the Protestant Reformation.
The trouble had begun back on October 31, 1517, when Luther sent his 95 Theses,protesting several Church practices and doctrines, to the Archbishop of Mainz and Magdeburg. By the next summer, Church authorities began to call Luther’s views heretical, though it took three years before Leo X moved formally against him. On June 15, 1520, he issued the bull Exsurge Domine(“Arise Oh Lord”) stating that 41 sentences in Luther’s 95 Theses were heresy.
The Pope gave Luther 60 days to recant these words and another 60 to inform the papacy of his cooperation. If not, the bull said, Luther would be excommunicated.
Luther at first thought the bull might be a trick created by enemies. Once he became convinced the document was indeed from the pope, he attacked it. In November, he published a treatise titled Assertion of All the Articles Wrongly Condemned in the Papal Bull, in which he defended his views—and called the Pope the Antichrist. Meanwhile, Luther’s own works were being burned by supporters of the Pope.
On December 10, sixty days after he had received the bull, Luther summoned his supporters to a gathering in Wittenberg, Germany, and had them build a bonfire. Into it they cast books of canon, or Church, law and Church-supported theological writings. To punctuate his defiance, Luther added a copy of Exsurge Domine to the fire. That response prompted Leo to carry out his threat and issue the excommunication.
The trouble had begun back on October 31, 1517, when Luther sent his 95 Theses,protesting several Church practices and doctrines, to the Archbishop of Mainz and Magdeburg. By the next summer, Church authorities began to call Luther’s views heretical, though it took three years before Leo X moved formally against him. On June 15, 1520, he issued the bull Exsurge Domine(“Arise Oh Lord”) stating that 41 sentences in Luther’s 95 Theses were heresy.
The Pope gave Luther 60 days to recant these words and another 60 to inform the papacy of his cooperation. If not, the bull said, Luther would be excommunicated.
Luther at first thought the bull might be a trick created by enemies. Once he became convinced the document was indeed from the pope, he attacked it. In November, he published a treatise titled Assertion of All the Articles Wrongly Condemned in the Papal Bull, in which he defended his views—and called the Pope the Antichrist. Meanwhile, Luther’s own works were being burned by supporters of the Pope.
On December 10, sixty days after he had received the bull, Luther summoned his supporters to a gathering in Wittenberg, Germany, and had them build a bonfire. Into it they cast books of canon, or Church, law and Church-supported theological writings. To punctuate his defiance, Luther added a copy of Exsurge Domine to the fire. That response prompted Leo to carry out his threat and issue the excommunication.
Last edited:
R
Randolph
Guest
For being a heretic, a poisonous anti-Semite and a revolutionary who wanted to destroy the Catholic Church, it’s still possible that he saved souls… But it’s tall order to convince me that Martin Luther was saving more souls than losing them—in the past 500 years.
Last edited:
J
Jaaye
Guest
People seem to forget that Martin Luther was excommunicated as a heretic … and also proclaimed an outlaw by the Edit of Worms by Charles VI of the the Holy Roman Empire – both of which endured to his death – there was no retraction or pardon or reprieve either by the church or by the state.
The church tried for over a year to work with him, then the pope issued his papal bull Exsurge Domine [you can read it on an earlier posting - # 177 The historical Luther (trying to get the facts right) - #177 by Jaaye] which gave him 60 days to repent, to dialogue, to turn away from his intended path. He contemptuously burned the bull in a very public display in Wittenberg and began preaching and teaching that the the pope was the Antichrist.
However, at this time in history church and state had different and defined roles (it was the Protestants who messed that up and joined religion to the state), so after excommunication which separated him from the church, it was up to the secular authorities to weigh judgement. He had his day in court, he again chose not to modify his position. He was declared an outlaw, banning his literature, and requiring his arrest. It also made it a crime for anyone in Germany to give Luther food or shelter, it actually permitted anyone to kill Luther without legal consequence.
The church tried for over a year to work with him, then the pope issued his papal bull Exsurge Domine [you can read it on an earlier posting - # 177 The historical Luther (trying to get the facts right) - #177 by Jaaye] which gave him 60 days to repent, to dialogue, to turn away from his intended path. He contemptuously burned the bull in a very public display in Wittenberg and began preaching and teaching that the the pope was the Antichrist.
However, at this time in history church and state had different and defined roles (it was the Protestants who messed that up and joined religion to the state), so after excommunication which separated him from the church, it was up to the secular authorities to weigh judgement. He had his day in court, he again chose not to modify his position. He was declared an outlaw, banning his literature, and requiring his arrest. It also made it a crime for anyone in Germany to give Luther food or shelter, it actually permitted anyone to kill Luther without legal consequence.
Last edited:
J
Jaaye
Guest
No. this is not correct. The laity are only required to adhere to the dogma of the church … it’s not like the pope snaps his fingers and we all fall into line. It doesn’t work like that … and I’m continually amazed at the (legion of) non-catholics who think so? Not sure where that comes from …?
==============
==============
fait ac·com·pli ˌfed əkämˈplē,ˌfād əkämˈplē/
noun noun: fait accompli; plural noun: faits accomplis
Definition: a thing that has already happened or been decided before those affected hear about it, leaving them with no option but to accept.
Last edited:
J
Jaaye
Guest
Luther Church in Sweden Directs Clergy to Stop Referring to God as "He"
Whooopsss. if this is true … I think that may set back the reunionification of Lutherans and Catholics a little … or at least add a new pile of affirmations to be discussed and agreed between the two.
www.lifesitenews.com
Whooopsss. if this is true … I think that may set back the reunionification of Lutherans and Catholics a little … or at least add a new pile of affirmations to be discussed and agreed between the two.
Church of Sweden directs clergy to stop referring to God as ‘He’ - LifeSite
Evangelical Lutherans will be instructed to use 'gender neutral' phrases for the Heavenly Father.
www.lifesitenews.com
R
rcwitness
Guest
Lol!! Wow… where do they come up with this stuff???
R
Randolph
Guest
I agree. An honest and fair student of history would see how the Church was extending her arms to Martin Luther to dialogue and to heal the wounds. But Luther wanted none of that, and in fact, mocked the noble efforts from the Church.
Throughout the life of the Church, after fruitful dialogues, many schismatic communities and heretical churches have indeed (thankfully) come back in full communion with Rome. But the process must be honest, sincere and focused on Christ. In the current Catholic-Lutheran dialogue, ignoring many historical facts and truths can not be good or accepted. The laity is not ignorant and naive as to not being able to read and discern history. I am obedient to and in fact agree with Vatican II on ecumenical dialogues. But the process must be truthful and honest. Just saying the Hierarchy said so — in the face of such complications, contradictions, and confusions—is just not acceptable. If the process bears fruit, it communicates itself and there is no need to say “because I said so—end of story.”
Throughout the life of the Church, after fruitful dialogues, many schismatic communities and heretical churches have indeed (thankfully) come back in full communion with Rome. But the process must be honest, sincere and focused on Christ. In the current Catholic-Lutheran dialogue, ignoring many historical facts and truths can not be good or accepted. The laity is not ignorant and naive as to not being able to read and discern history. I am obedient to and in fact agree with Vatican II on ecumenical dialogues. But the process must be truthful and honest. Just saying the Hierarchy said so — in the face of such complications, contradictions, and confusions—is just not acceptable. If the process bears fruit, it communicates itself and there is no need to say “because I said so—end of story.”
Last edited:
G
Gorgias
Guest
Umm… you might want to familiarize yourself with the phrases “assent of theological faith”, “firm and definitive assent”, “teachings to be held definitively”, and “religious submission of will and intellect.” These are not all in reference to only dogmas; nevertheless, not only ‘dogma’ but other types of theological assertions are made by the Church, and Catholics are expected to assent to them.
In response to your claim, it’s not the case that Catholics are expected to assent only to dogma.
Last edited:
R
rcwitness
Guest
Yeah, like a Papal Bull too. 
Last edited:
P
PickyPicky
Guest
J
Jaaye
Guest
Yep we do disagree on this. The quote below, which I was referring to, does not address a matter of theology or definitive teachings or beliefs … at this point the “reunification dialogue” (for lack of a better phrasing) is hopeful (wishful) thinking… and using the phrase “fait accompli” and implying that “now all you catholics have to believe this because the pope and heirarchy said so” — which is how I understood the point being made by THAT poster … I said was not correct.
As to your quote below … I also disagree. There is no “expectation” of agreement (perhaps that was an unfortunate choice of words?) we are either Catholic or we are not. To “be” Catholic, we are required to believe and hold in faith the dogmas of the church, we can be excommunicated if we reject any of the church’s doctrines /dogmas … excommunication is the means of the church that separates us from the church — we cease to “be” Catholic.
Last edited:
J
Jaaye
Guest
I said IF this was true … that it could be problematic for reunification dialogue … I think that is still a fair statement to make.
Assuming the clip you posted is also NOT fake news and is a true representation of the position of the Lutheran Church… it also is a bit problematic … per the quote below (highlighting is mine):
We have here what appears to be taking a page right out of Luther’s playbook that caused such a ruckus in the first place (i.e. changing / mistranslating sacred scripture and in the process losing or altering the meaning of the inspired Word of God)
I read the revised and corrected article you provided (thank you) and from that reading I understand that what they are saying is they changed /updated phraseology in a Swedish language (vernacular) Bible back in 2000 – and now want to bring the 1996 handbook language in line with the updated translation. Helloooo?
Assuming the clip you posted is also NOT fake news and is a true representation of the position of the Lutheran Church… it also is a bit problematic … per the quote below (highlighting is mine):
This tracks right back to several posts on this forum …where Catholics are saying it is important to KNOW and RESPECT past history and not white-wash it.
We have here what appears to be taking a page right out of Luther’s playbook that caused such a ruckus in the first place (i.e. changing / mistranslating sacred scripture and in the process losing or altering the meaning of the inspired Word of God)
I read the revised and corrected article you provided (thank you) and from that reading I understand that what they are saying is they changed /updated phraseology in a Swedish language (vernacular) Bible back in 2000 – and now want to bring the 1996 handbook language in line with the updated translation. Helloooo?
R
rcwitness
Guest
So somebody formally excommunicated by the Bishop of Rome for heresy, and who burned the Bull and called the Pope an antichrist, and established a continuous invalid Sacrament can be a witness to His Eucharist?
Last edited:
- Status