The Name "Lutheran"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eden
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Eden

Guest
What is the Lutheran explanation for the continued use of the name, given that Luther himself did not wish for his followers to call themselves “Lutheran”?

"I ask that my name be left silent and people not call themselves Lutheran, but rather Christians. Who is Luther? The doctrine is not mine. I have been crucified for no one. St. Paul in 1 Cor. 3:4-5 would not suffer that the Christians should call themselves of Paul or of Peter, but Christian. How should I, a poor stinking bag of worms, become so that the children of Christ are named with my unholy name? It should not be dear friends. Let us extinguish all factious names and be called Christians whose doctrine we have. The pope’s men rightly have a factious name because they are not satisfied with the doctrine and name of Christ and want to be with the pope, who is their master. I have not been and will not be a master. Along with the church I have the one general teaching of Christ who alone is our master. Matt. 23:8.

This judgment of Luther is as clear as the sun. he did not want in any way that the church should be named after him and even less did he want this to happen for his own glory."
 
Our Lutheran friends have been calling themselves “Reformed Catholics”.
 
40.png
DeniseR:
Our Lutheran friends have been calling themselves “Reformed Catholics”.
Click to expand...
Deformed catholics would be more appropriate.
 
The first Lutherans did not call themselves by the name of their founder, but that is what Catholics labelled them. When other Protestant sects quickly followed, such as Calvinists and Anabaptists, it was necessary for them to keep the name ‘Lutheran’ to differentiate them from all the other schismatics.

They’re Heretics, plain and simple. I think that even if Luther were resurrected today, he would be horrified by what modern Lutheranism has become.
 
40.png
Neithan:
The first Lutherans did not call themselves by the name of their founder, but that is what Catholics labelled them. When other Protestant sects quickly followed, such as Calvinists and Anabaptists, it was necessary for them to keep the name ‘Lutheran’ to differentiate them from all the other schismatics.

They’re Heretics, plain and simple. I think that even if Luther were resurrected today, he would be horrified by what modern Lutheranism has become.
Click to expand...
They’re not orthodox (note small o), that’s for sure. But to be a “heretic”, one first has to be a Roman Catholic.

m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=heretic

a dissenter from established church dogma; especially : a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed truth
 
40.png
Neithan:
The first Lutherans did not call themselves by the name of their founder, but that is what Catholics labelled them. When other Protestant sects quickly followed, such as Calvinists and Anabaptists, it was necessary for them to keep the name ‘Lutheran’ to differentiate them from all the other schismatics.

They’re Heretics, plain and simple. I think that even if Luther were resurrected today, he would be horrified by what modern Lutheranism has become.
Click to expand...
Why do they continue to use that name, having full access to documents that leave no doubt that Luther did not want this to be so?
 
It is mainly in n.america only that they call themselves lutherans.in europe and other places they are known as the evangelical church or evangelical catholics.bt the way i was raised lcms so i know the church history fairly well.american tourists of the evangelical variety have been known to wander in to a evangelical(lutheran)church in germany and be totally confused by the highly liturgical service(honey wheres the praise band?)thanks for the classy comments about your seperated brethren(deformed,heretics,etc.)speaks highly of your christian witness! in christ,celt
 
40.png
azcelt:
It is mainly in n.america only that they call themselves lutherans.in europe and other places they are known as the evangelical church or evangelical catholics.bt the way i was raised lcms so i know the church history fairly well.american tourists of the evangelical variety have been known to wander in to a evangelical(lutheran)church in germany and be totally confused by the highly liturgical service(honey wheres the praise band?)thanks for the classy comments about your seperated brethren(deformed,heretics,etc.)speaks highly of your christian witness! in christ,celt
Click to expand...
I have only seen Lutherans refer to “Evangelical” in conjunction with “Lutheran” i.e. “Evangelical Lutheran” which still does not explain the use of Luther’s name for the religion. I believe in Germany it is called “Die Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche”.
 
azcelt,
We’re just calling it like it is. I’m sure that Martin Luther called Catholics much worse.

Your sister in Christ,
Corinne
 
James- I’m reading your link now. I’ll be back. Thanks for the link.
 
James- First I want to thank you for give me the link to read what a Lutheran has written on the subject. I see from your posts that you are very dedicated to the dissemination and study of the Protestant faiths and are eager to share it with others.

That being said, the title of the article “Concerning the Name ‘Lutheran’” is somewhat misleading. 3/4 of the article was a justification of why the Lutheran Church should be rather than why it should be called “Lutheran”. The actual analysis and explanation for why Lutherans continue to use the name of Luther could have been condensed to one paragraph. Instead I had to weed through the rhetoric.

Here are the main points in the article:

Part IA "Is it Wrong to Use Such a Name?"
  1. Lutherans did not give themselves the name - It was used as an insult.
  2. Luther did not want his followers to call themselves Lutheran.
  3. It is not always sinful to name oneselves after a man because God renamed Jacob “Israel” and thus we had the “Israelites”
  4. Sometimes it is sinful to be named after a man but it is not sinful to be named after Luther
    ( Luther and Jacob/Israel are made equivalent. But God had a direct relationship with Jacob/Israel and Luther never claimed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit - “We do not accept him as any apostle or prophet but rather we know that he was subject to error and sin like other men.”)
Did I come to understand why Lutherans do not view using the name of Luther as inconsistent with Christian beliefs? - NO

Part IIB "What Does it Mean to be a Lutheran?"
  1. The name Lutheran is used not because they want this name to separate them from other orthodox believers like the Corinthians did.
  2. It is used not because their faith is based upon Luther.
  3. It is used not because they want to show that they confess a new doctrine and a new church, a sect.
  4. Lutherans believe that with the name “Lutheran” they confess that they belong to the true catholic (universal) church, whose doctrine Luther preached. (But Luther was not an apostle, prophet or inspired by the Holy Spirit.)
Did I come to understand why Lutherans do not view using the name of Luther as inconsistent with Christian beliefs? - NO

PART IIIA ""Why Do We Continue to Keep This Name?"
1)The name Lutheran separates the Lutherans from all other faiths.
2) Using the names Protestant, Christian, Methodist or Evangelical would not separate Lutherans from other faiths.
3) Since the Catholic Church already uses the name “catholic”, “catholic” is not available.
4) Since the Orthodox Church uses the name “orthodox”, “orthodox” is not available.

Did I come to understand why Lutherans do not view using the name of Luther as inconsistent with their Christian beliefs? - NO

PART IIIB "Why Do We Continue to Use This Name?"
  1. If Lutherans get rid of the name, people may think that they are ashamed of the old Lutheran doctrine or that they no longer consider it to be the only true doctrine.
  2. Luther fought the idea as an abomination that someone should call himself Lutheran on account of an idolatrous faith in Luther’s person.
  3. Luther “understood” that he did not have to consider it objectionable if one calls himself Lutheran in order to distinguish himself. (I put understood in quotes because I’ve never seen anything to indicate that he felt anything other than repelled at the thought of the name “Lutheran”.)
  4. Whether Luther was a “knave or saint” does not matter.
  5. Luther’s doctrine is not his but Christ’s himself (Lutherans acknowledge that Luther was not an apostle, a prophet or directly inspired by the Holy Spirit but believe that Luther’s doctrine is the real one… There is no explanation for why he had the authority to claim that.)
Did I come to understand why Lutherans do not view using the name of Luther as inconsistent with Christian beliefs? - NO

CONCLUSION- The Lutherans realize that the name could be considered questionable however, they don’t have any other name to use.
 
corrine,if your really my sister in christ you,d show a little more humility,talk is cheap.in christianUNITY, celt
 
How about Lutherans adopting a symbol, like the artist formerly known as Prince? Would that satisfy all of you?

Anyone who is not out to pick a pointless fight knows why Lutherans call themselves that. It solely is a matter of identification. That’s it.

At this point, I suppose the Orthodox are asking why Rome calls itself the “Catholic” Church. After all, the Roman Church is not universal. It split away from the “real” church. Or so the Orthodox say. Perhaps the followers of the bishop of Rome should call themselves the Marian Church, or something like that.
 
40.png
azcelt:
corrine,if your really my sister in christ you,d show a little more humility,talk is cheap.in christianUNITY, celt
Click to expand...
azcelt, I’m just telling it like it is. I read about Martin Luther on New Advent and I can assure you that he showed tons of hatred toward Catholics after he left the Church. I apologize for not showing humility. My name is Corinne.

my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne
 
40.png
coralewisjr:
azcelt, I’m just telling it like it is. I read about Martin Luther on New Advent and I can assure you that he showed tons of hatred toward Catholics after he left the Church. I apologize for not showing humility. My name is Corinne.

my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne
Click to expand...
Got that, azcelt? Here is a quiz to test your understanding of the issue. 500 years ago, a dead man said mean things about some people in Italy. Therefore, Corinne is going to:
  1. Follow Jesus’ Gospel "38"You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
  2. Agree with the Joint Declaration that "Thus the doctrinal condemnations of the 16th century, in so far as they relate to the doctrine of justification, appear in a new light: The teaching of the Lutheran churches presented in this Declaration does not fall under the condemnations from the Council of Trent. The condemnations in the Lutheran Confessions do not apply to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church presented in this Declaration."
  3. Take the position that if someone dishes it out, he better be able to take it.
(Hint: 1 John 3:14.)
 
40.png
RonWI:
How about Lutherans adopting a symbol, like the artist formerly known as Prince? Would that satisfy all of you?
Click to expand...
CONCLUSION- The Lutherans realize that the name could be considered questionable however, they don’t have any other name to use except a symbol like the artist formerly known as Prince.
 
40.png
RonWI:
Anyone who is not out to pick a pointless fight knows why Lutherans call themselves that. It solely is a matter of identification. That’s it.
Click to expand...
I read the article with an open mind. In fact, I read it several times and took notes to make sure that I had not overlooked a major point. I reached my conclusion based on what I was provided. You can agree with my conclusion or not. Nevertheless, if the only legitimate way to identify yourself is by the name of a man, I would question the legitimacy of the entire endeavor.
 
40.png
Eden:
James- First I want to thank you for give me the link to read what a Lutheran has written on the subject. I see from your posts that you are very dedicated to the dissemination and study of the Protestant faiths and are eager to share it with others.
Click to expand...
Hi Eden,

I know I must appear to be a fire-breathing Lutheran, but alas, I am not a Lutheran. I provided you the link out of courtesy. The author of that essay though was a well respected Lutheran scholar. I thought you would find it interesting. My specialty is not “Lutheranism”, but rather “Martin Luther.”

I agree that Luther did not want a church named after him. He didn’t even like his theology to be called “Lutheran”-

“I do not like it that folk call our doctrine and people “Lutheran” and that I must suffer them to disgrace God’s Word with my name in this shameful manner. Nevertheless, they shall let this Luther the ‘Lutheran’ doctrine and people, remain and come to honor.”

Source: What Luther Says, entry 4413

I haven’t followed this thread too closely. What exactly is your point? If you’ve spelled it out clearly, and i’ve missed, my apologies, i’m multi-tasking, and I’m not very good multi tasking.

It seems to me, for better or for worse, the name “Lutheranism” stuck. What bearing does it have pointing out that Luther didn’t care for this to be?

I know some Lutherans. They are not Lutherans because they have a special love for Martin Luther, or look to him as the “be all to end all” in theology. Rather, they go to their particular church to hear the Gospel preached, and to embrace Christ by faith alone. If you were to outlaw the use of the term “Lutheran” they would still go to their particular church to hear the Gospel preached, and to embrace Christ by faith alone.

Regards,
James Swan
 
40.png
coralewisjr:
azcelt, I’m just telling it like it is. I read about Martin Luther on New Advent and I can assure you that he showed tons of hatred toward Catholics after he left the Church. I apologize for not showing humility. My name is Corinne.
my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne
Click to expand...
Hi Corinne,

Just a minor tangent- I find many of the articles in the Catholic Encyclopedia over at New Advent useful and helpful. In regards to the “Luther” entry, I cannot say the same. American Catholics in the first half of the twentieth century were guided in their understanding of Luther by that article in the Catholic Encyclopedia written by George Ganss (1855 – 1912).Ganss was strongly influenced by Denifle, and he has been credited for bringing the views of Denifle to the English speaking world. Denifle was extremely biased and negative towards Luther as was Ganss.

Interestingly, when the New Catholic Encyclopedia came out, Ganss article was not used.

I have covered the “Luther” entry over at New Advent in this paper:

ntrmin.org/The%20Roman%20Catholic%20Understanding%20of%20Martin%20Luther%201.htm

See specifically section V.

This is not to suggest that you are incorrect in pointing out the negative names Luther called the Papacy and Roman Catholics. In his sometimes harsh languages, Luther was less than charitable and downright nasty. But, simply because he did it, is no reason for us to do it- agreed?

Regards,
James Swan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top