The historical Luther (trying to get the facts right)

[Jaaye]

And yet you are still spinning useless quotes (undated and undocumented) into the discussion. We are endeavoring to follow the path of the HISTORICAL Luther … to examine what he said at the time of his excommunication …his words… his doctrine…as he developed them and published them in the 16th century.

" Even if he would, he could not lose his salvation, however much he sinned, unless he refused to believe. For no sin can condemn him save unbelief alone"

This is the quote you said Father O’Connor presented in error. Wrong. It expresses Luther’s view of faith alone (through baptism) as written in 1520 in “The Babylonian Captivity of the Church”.

Do you have any information to share about THIS quote … THIS doctrine of Luther? If not, we’ll just continue with our chronology that we left off with Luther entering the monastery … and work our way towards this 1520 quote and the other documents he published against the church leading up to his excommunication. [See Post#303 The historical Luther (trying to get the facts right) - #333 by Jaaye ]

 

[JonNC]

All I’ve done is post Luther quotes and modern Catholic theologians such as Pesch and Wicks. And some personal comments.
You can post what you want, even offer proof that the quotes I’ve offered lack authenticity.
I’ll post what I want. You post what you want.

May you be blessed this Advent season

Jon

 

[De_Maria]

I went through more of the Beggarsall website, a pro-Luther website, just to make sure I hadn’t misinterpreted what they wrote. Here’s another excerpt.

But what then is the practical application of sinning “boldly”? What is at the heart of this comparison? Luther explains elsewhere how to take on the attitude of sinning “boldly”:

Therefore let us arm our hearts with these and similar statements of Scripture so that, when the devil accuses us by saying: You are a sinner; therefore you are damned, we can reply: The very fact that you say I am a sinner makes me want to be just and saved. Nay, you will be damned, says the devil. Indeed not, I reply, for I take refuge in Christ, who gave Himself for my sins. Therefore you will accomplish nothing, Satan, by trying to frighten me by setting the greatness of my sins before me and thus seducing me to sadness, doubt, despair, hatred, contempt, and blasphemy of God. Indeed, by calling me a sinner you are supplying me with weapons against yourself so that I can slay and destroy you with your own sword; for Christ died for sinners. Furthermore, you yourself proclaim the glory of God to me; you remind me of God’s paternal love for me, a miserable and lost sinner; for He so loved the world that He gave His Son (John 3:16Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)). Again, whenever you throw up to me that I am a sinner, you revive in my memory the blessing of Christ, my Redeemer, on whose shoulders, and not on mine, lie all my sins; for “the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all” and “for the transgression of His people was He stricken” (Is. 53:6-8Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)). Therefore when you throw up to me that I am a sinner, you are not terrifying me; you are comforting me beyond measure[Ewald Plass, What Luther Says 3:1315].

The strong hyperbolic comparison Luther makes between “sinning boldly” and believing and rejoicing in Christ “even more boldly” comes clear. When assaulted by the fear and doubt of Christ’s love because of previous sins or the remnants of sin in one’s life, one is thrust back into the arms of Christ “on whose shoulders, and not on mine, lie all my sins…”. Rather than promoting a license to sin by saying “sin boldly,” Luther compares the sinner to the perfect savior. Left in our sins we will face nothing but death and damnation. By Christ’s victory over sin, death, and the world, we stand clothed in His righteousness, the recipients of His grace, no matter what we have done.

Notice that they don’t deny that Luther said, “sin boldly”. They simply justify it by calling it hyperbole. What they don’t mention is that he never says, repent of your sins and do your best never to commit them again. Instead he says that his sins are on Christ’s shoulders.

This is precisely the Protestant heresy that we are once saved always saved and that no sin committed after justification can separate us from Christ.

So, I’m confident that I provided a fair representation of their position in my previous post.

 

[De_Maria]

Another quote from the Beggarsall group.

Here we see that Luther had no respect for the Catholic Church. The Beggarsall website provides this quote to boast that Luther rejected the St. Augustine quote, “I would not believe the Gospels were it not for the authority of the Catholic Church.” Here’s a small excerpt of what Luther is quoted as having said by this pro-Luther group:

Augustine speaks of the whole Church, and says that throughout the world it with one consent preaches the Gospel and not the Letter of the Manicheans; and this unanimous authority of the Church moves him to consider it the true Gospel. But our tyrants apply this name of the Church to themselves, as if the laymen and the common people were not also Christians. And what they teach they want men to consider as the teaching of the Christian Church, although, they are a minority, and we, who are universal Christendom, should also be consulted about what is to be taught in the name of universal Christendom. See, so cleverly do they quote the words of St. Augustine: what he says of the Church throughout all the world, they would have us understand of the Roman See.

But our tyrants apply this name of the Church to themselves,

I’m pretty certain that Luther is there referring to the Pope and Bishops of the Catholic Church as tyrants. But, you be the judge.

 

[Jaaye]

Yes you did. I apologize if you thought I was questioning your post. My remark was directed at the other poster who repeatedly failed to address the Luther quote about baptizing / sinning, but posted various random non-applicable posts instead.

 

[JonNC]

An interesting article here that is, in the end, somewhat critical of Lutheran respond e to the change in Catholic evaluation of Luther starting with Lortz, which signals a decline of the polemical writers such as O’Connor, Denifle, and others.

https://reformation500.csl.edu/2013/12/08/reformation-at-500-and-vatican-ii-at-50-the-luther-link/

_No single example of this new disposition may be more instructive than the Catholic interpretation of Luther. In the four centuries following the Reformation, Luther had been pictured by Catholic historians and theologians as a pariah—literally a seven-headed monster, to use the image adorning a tract by Johann Cochlaeus in the sixteenth century. Just as Protestants continued vilifying the papacy and Catholic doctrine, Catholics produced deprecating portrayals of Luther. Little had changed by the start of the twentieth century. The two most famous Catholic interpreters of Luther at the time, the Dominican Heinrich Denifle and the Jesuit Hartmann Grisar, alternately attributed Luther’s failings to sexual deviance and personal neurosis.

This image would not last the century. The chief protagonist was Joseph Lortz, a German Catholic historian of the Reformation, who began to look more closely at Luther’s life and thought in its medieval context. He argued that Luther was caught in a transition from the medieval scholasticism of Aquinas to the late-medieval nominalism of William of Ockham and Gabriel Biel—the latter representing a degradation of Catholicism. Luther did not seek to reject the Catholic Church, according to Lortz, but rather he inherited a Catholicism that was from the start corrupted by the nominalists: Luther fought against a Catholicism he had learned that was not really “Catholic,” but a late-medieval deviation.

Others would pick up Lortz’s mantle. Erwin Iserloh considered Luther and his doctrine of justification inherently compatible with medieval mysticism. Peter Manns found in Luther’s second Galatians commentary a definition of justification that was congruent with Roman Catholic thought. Otto Hermann Pesch compared Luther with Aquinas and came to the conclusion that they were fundamentally in agreement on the doctrine of justification, but approached it from two entirely different vantage points—Luther from the “existential” perspective of the struggling sinner, Aquinas from the “sapiential” perspective of the omniscient God. Others could be added, including Hans Küng, Yves Congar, Louis Bouyer, Daniel Olivier, Jared Wicks, Dennis Janz, to name a few, but it is not necessary to proliferate examples. Without question, the renewed Roman Catholic interest in Luther and improved perception of him led to a healthier interaction with his ideas among the council fathers at Vatican II._

Continued

 

[JonNC]

Don Ruggero, a Catholic priest made clear on this thread that the type of polemics represented by O’Connor and his ilk no longer represent post Vatican II Catholic theological practice. It shouldn’t represent non-Catholic practice either.
If that “healthier interaction” mentioned above is to be successful, apologists must too move away from19th century polemics.
The historical Luther is not found in O’Connor and O’Hare anymore than the Catholic Church is found in an Anti-Catholic writer.

 

[De_Maria]

I apologize if you thought I was questioning your post.

No. It’s just that I’ve been accused of twisting people’s words and uncharitable comments and all these things. That’s why I’m taking the info from a famously pro-Lutheran website which pretty well celebrates all of Luther’s outrageous comments and tries to spin them as virtuous.

My remark was directed at the other poster who repeatedly failed to address the Luther quote about baptizing / sinning, but posted various random non-applicable posts instead.

Yeah, well, he’s got his own agenda. Apparently, he doesn’t know the difference between “balance” and “truth”.

This idea of “balance” is a mere rabbit trail. What good is this so-called “balance” if it obscures the truth.

The truth is that Luther started the Protestant revolution by:

1. Breaking his vows to God.
2. Rebelling against the Divine authority of the Catholic Church.
3. Teaching errors based upon his own erroneous interpretations of Scripture.
4. Setting aside the Sacred Traditions that Jesus passed down through His Church.
5. Setting aside the Teachings of the Magisterium.
6. And, he’s also guilty of vulgar speech and the teaching of immoral deeds such, “if the wife won’t, the maid will” and "it’s ok to get another wife as long as you keep it secret.

It’s never been an excuse to commit any sins and yet claim that, “but, he believes in God though.” As though that made it all right. In fact, the Scripture says:

Luke 12:47 That servant who knew his master’s will but did not make preparations nor act in accord with his will shall be beaten severely;

Matthew 12:36 I tell you, on the day of judgment people will render an account for every careless word they speak.

 

[De_Maria]

Don Ruggero, a Catholic priest made clear on this thread that the type of polemics represented by O’Connor and his ilk no longer represent post Vatican II Catholic theological practice.

How about the writings of the pro-Lutheran group designated beggarsall? Did he comment upon the evidence they provide as to Luther’s true sayings?

 

[Jaaye]

Which is why…of course … by walking along the timeline chronologically we are endeavoring to examine Luther’s own documents … what he wrote and what he said… in his words… HIS documents … published under his name. In that way we, as members of the forum, will be presented with his doctrine the same as the general German public was in the 16th Century.

Yes, I’ve heard you repeatedly label Father O’Connor as a polemic, each can decide for themselves if any commentary added to the data (Father O’Connor’s or anyone else’s) is valid. But the important thing is to have access to the data – people can discard any of the commentary at will. And isn’t that in and of itself so very “Luther-ish” who was adamant there was no over ruling authority in interpretation and each should examine the data for their own interpretation … scriptural or otherwise?

 

[JonNC]

Luther’s Rehabilitation in Recent Roman Catholic Opinion - Crossings | The Crossings Community

Colleagues, Today's posting comes from Jose [Joe] B. Fuliga, one-time president of the Lutheran Church in the Philippines. Fuliga has an ancient connection with Crossings. Here's how: Cathy Lessmann, Crossings executive director for ages, is a "missionary kid" born in Davao City in the...

crossings.org

Crossings.org is neither Lutheran nor Catholic, but in this blog provides quotes by Catholic theologians the likes of Father Tavard and Cardinal Kasper.
No one can accuse these Catholics of having a whitewashed view of Luther, neither have they a view of Luther based on limited snippets of his writings. They are Catholics, not Lutherans. They are theologians, not apologists.

Catholic scholar George Tavard wrote in his book PROTESTANTISM that there is no real contradiction between Roman Catholic theology and Luther’s gospel. Tavard explains that when Luther began his work as a Reformer, the gospel was in “partial eclipse.” “Today many Catholic scholars think Luther was right in his central doctrine of justification by faith and the [sixteenth century Catholic] church was blind to the point he was making…Both Lutherans and Catholics agree that good works by Christian believers are the result of their faith and the working of divine grace in them, not their personal contributions to their own salvation. Christ is the only Savior. One does not save oneself… Luther’s doctrine of justification by faith needs to be recognized and endorsed as an expression of the perennial Catholic tradition.”

“If we use ‘faith’ as Luther did and as Paul did in Romans and Galatians, that is, heart-faith, then this is saving faith. It is sufficient for salvation, for it necessarily produces the good works…” Peter Kreeft & Ronald Tacelli, HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS (Downers Grove, Illinois, 1994), p. 31.

“The official teaching of Catholics (as distinct from the popular misconception) is that salvation is a totally free gift that we can do nothing to ‘buy’ or ‘produce’ it.” Kreeft & Tacelli, Ibid., p. 321.

If we are actually going to get the facts right on Luther, the polemicists and white washers of the past are not reliable sources.

 

[Jaaye]

If we are actually going to get the facts right on Luther, the polemicists and white washers of the past are not reliable sources.

Well, hopefully you consider Luther’s own words a reliable source?

Whenever possible my proposal is to examine Luther’s own words, his own published documents in the 16th Century, when he said them … and the impact of his words on the historical events of that time … I’ve stated that is my approach repeatedly but for some (unknown) reason you keep posting various modern quotes some 400 and 500 years later …some of which may paraphrase Luther and some with no actual Luther quotes in them at all — but modern reflection and opinion. Puzzling.

 

[Jaaye]

Continuing the chronological timeline begun in Post #303 of Luther’s harsh childhood and early years The historical Luther (trying to get the facts right) - #333 by Jaaye

We now pick up when he entered the Augustinian Monastery at Erfurt

Luther – Augustinian Monastery , Erfurt - 1505 to 1508
17 July 1505 Enters Monastery
August 1506 Takes Final Vows
19 Sep 1506 Ordained a subdeacon (preliminary step to priesthood)
3 April 1507 Luther ordained a Priest at Erfurt Cathedral
2 May 1507 Celebrates First Mass

Luther entered monastic life and endeavored to please God through his dedication. Devout, earnest, self-critical and relentlessly self-disciplined he engaged in extended fasts, long hours of prayer and frequent confession (seeking the confessional many times in the same day). He remarked, “If anyone could have gained heaven as a monk, then I would indeed have been among them”. [Ref – Scribd Link]

He performed his share of manual labor and as the Augustine’s were a mendicant order, he begged in the city with the other monks.

His studies did not include St.Thomas Acquinas or Augustine but were ”principally the writings of Occam, Gabriel Biel, some Church Fathers, John Gerson and Cardinal Peter d’Ally the latter two contained various theological errors and defects concerning papal authority”. He attended lectures on the Sentences of Peter Lombard and pursued scriptural studies (he was once reprimanded by one of his professors for neglecting his theological studies in favor of his study of scripture). [Ref: Augnet-Luther Link]

Upon ordination he entered into his new life being attentive to the Rule of St. Augustine under the competent guidance of his spiritual director and the older friars. “During this period Luther seemed satisfied and looked forward with eager expectation to the monastic life, which he called a ‘heavenly life’. From the first at Erfurt however ,”he brooded much and was constantly worried and depressed by ‘the fear of God’s judgement, gloomy thoughts on predestination and the recollections of his own sins” [Ibid]

In 1508 he relocated to Wittenberg and began teaching theology at the University of Wittenberg

References: https://www.scribd.com/document/6755407/Martin-Luther
AUGNET : 4389 Biography - Erfurt

 

[Jaaye]

Luther – Augustinian Monastery , Wittenberg - 1508 to 1512

At Wittenberg, Luther met and was mentored by Johann Von Staupitz, who remained a catholic, yet also an abiding presence in his life. Luther described him as his “father in God” and once said, “if it had not been for Dr. Staupitz, I should have sunk in hell”. [Ref: Augnet-Staupitz Link]

“Johann von Stauptiz was born near Leisnig, Germany in about the year 1460. He joined the Order of Saint Augustine … In 1497, he moved to the Augustinian friary at Tübingen, where in 1498 he became leader of the Augustinian community, on Oct 1498 he commenced the biblical course and, on 10th January 1499 (a Iittle more than two months later), he began to deliver theological lectures on the Sentences of Peter Lombard.

Half a year of this qualified him for the Licentiate and a day later, in a step that made a farce of what in previous centuries had been the highest of hard-earned academic accolades, he was designated as a Doctor of Divinity.

A generation later, Luther’s defective, unmethodical, shallow, self-acquired theological training is more understandable in view of the superficial theological preparation of Staupitz, who in many ways was Luther’s mentor.

Staupitz was subsequently made leader of the Augustinian community at Munich, and in 1503 was elected Vicar-General of the observant congregation of the Augustinians in Germany. On a tour of visitation Staupitz became acquainted with Luther in the house (convento) of the Order at Erfurt”. [Ibid]

References: AUGNET : 4374 Johann von Staupitz
https://www.scribd.com/document/6755407/Martin-Luther
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/2016/10/26/martin-luthers-revolt-a-psychological-examination

Coming Tomorrow… More on Luther and Staupitz’s Relationship

 

[JonNC]

Luther’s own words

Luther’s Works (55 vols.)

The 55-volume set of Luther's Works, a monumental translation project published jointly by Fortress Press and Concordia Publishing House in 1957, is singular in its value to church historians, Luther scholars, and Christians.

www.logos.com

By comparison, Father O’Connor’s booklet is less than 75 pages. Accepting his presentation based on a few snippets is like evaluating Catholic teaching based on Catholic quotes presented in a document authored by Michael Gendron.

 

[Jaaye]

Father O’Connor’s little pamphlet sure seems to annoy you. As I’ve said (on multiple occasions), the value of the O’Connor booklet is the access to Luther’s own words in English, the accompanying commentary (which you characterize as polemic) is secondary … and easily accepted or dismissed or discarded by each reader in their own judgement. Feel free to pull quotes from the 55 Volume Set of Luther’s works if you feel anything anyone presents in the Forum on Luther is in error.

Below is a link to the pamphlet that is so annoying to our friend — for those of you who are curious to read it. It’s 76-ish pages, but it is pamphlet-sized, not a book, so its a relatively quick read

https://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/Luthers%20Own%20Statements.pdf

 

[JonNC]

Does Michael Gendron annoy you? He does me. Polemicists who add to our divisions with half truths and misrepresentations should annoy anyone who believes the ecumenism started at Vatican II is the better direction to go in.
Anyone who cares about the Church Militant should view polemicists like O’Connor, Gendron, O’Hare and Chick with great skepticism, and yes, assume that verification from an honorable source is needed.

 

[JonNC]

Below is a link to the pamphlet that is so annoying to our friend — for those of you who are curious to read it. It’s 76-ish pages, but it is pamphlet-sized, not a book, so its a relatively quick read

http://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/Luthers Own Statements.pdf

To those who do so, and I recommend it, one must recognize that the claim of this booklet to present Luther words regarding his own teachings is at best suspect.
Father O’Connor’s conclusions are at odds with not only the understanding of Lutherans, but also many Catholic theologians and scholars today.
Again, I wouldn’t rely on O’Connor for an honest evaluation of Luther anymore than I would Gendron for an honest evaluation of Catholic teaching.

 

[Jaaye]

Yes, we get it that “polemicist” is one of your favorite words to use, it appears to be applied by you to anyone and everyone who has a point of view or opinion that disagrees with your own.

 

[Jaaye]

one must recognize that the claim of this booklet to present Luther words regarding his own teachings is at best suspect.

Actually that is not the claim of the book at all. The premise of the book, published in 1884 by a catholic priest, is to ask a very important question…

seeking to answer the question posed by O’Connor: “Can Luther be looked upon as a Reformer commissioned by Almighty God?” O’Connor opines that whenever prophets or apostles act as chosen instruments of God we also find:

A. That the manner in which they teach is in accordance with the supreme dignity of Him who sends them;

B. That the doctrines which they inculcate are worthy of the God of all truth; and,

C. That the results of their teaching are such as to entitle them to be revered as the messengers of a God of Infinite Holiness

So Father O’Connor examines Luther’s writings in this regard and asks the reader to hold the documents up to the afore-mentioned 3-fold test … excerpts are provided in the booklet (for the sake of brevity), along with full citations allowing the discerning reader to seek out and examine the full and complete text of original source if he so desires. each can evaluate the content along with the commentary for themselves.