I am pretty sure that this was where Luther’s first doubts arose. Do you really think he was out to divide or maybe even destroy the Church? He was raised in the Church and there was none other. The Church was all that he knew and he even became a monk and then a priest and then a professor for Theology. Do you really think that his efforts and his intentions were anything further than trying to cleanse the Church?
Have you read his writings?
Here’s his response on sola fide, when criticized by the Church
http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/luther-translate.txt
J:
Who are we to try and define his motives?
After reading Luther’s response to one of the biggest issues of the protestant revolt, is there still hesitency in your mind?
J:
I cannot define your motives, even though I could ask you an abundance of questions. I cannot see into your heart and that is why I will always assume the best.
What conclusion are you hinting at? I agree with Luther on a couple of issues, though certainly not all. If I did agree to a greater extend I would probably be Lutheran. I also admit that I have a lot in common with Luther, starting with a Catholic upbringing and ending with my turning away from the Catholic Church**.**
Sola scriptura and sola fide is the protestant rally cry, right?
Luther (i.e. ALL dissenters/dividers as well) by leaving the Catholic Church, showed ignorance of both faith, AND scripture…
How you ask?
Paul to the Church of Rome.
Rom 16:
17 I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.
18 For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
19 Everyone has heard about your obedience, so I rejoice because of you; but I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil."
how evil is the sin of division? it’s catastrophic to the soul
To the Church of Galatia
Gal 5:
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery;
20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions
21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Luther’s dissent and division remained. As did Calvin, and Henry VIII, etc etc and all those who followed in their footsteps… Paul said, heaven won’t be in ones future if they die with any of these sins on their soul.
J:
I would not tell you that you are a heretic for believing what you do believe. I cannot see into your heart.
Being a heretic isn’t just a matter of the heart. "*Heresy *is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same’;
can heresy be objectively decided on? Yes. Therefore so can a heretic.
J:
I know that I live the Lord my God with all my heart, mind and soul and I don’t believe myself to be a heretic, even though you might declare me one. You wouldn’t be the first one to do so and I am not offended by the term anymore. I have been called many names, many of which I do not agree with. I am however not offended by that position or these terms.
If you love Him why did you leave Him in the Eucharist? You left the sacraments that He established for your benefit. Name me ANYBODY who is not in huge trouble without the sacraments? You already know what Paul said above. Here’s what Jesus said
Jn 6:
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you,
unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.
57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.
58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you?
62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!
63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life.
64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.
65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.
Does Jesus leave any wiggle room for those who walk away from the Eucharist? No.
All protestants (I can’t say non-Catholics because that would include EOC) - defer to the authority of the bible alone as their final means at arriving at truth via private interpreation, as opposed to any one protestant church, with the exception of your church.
) One can now read three or four pages without stumbling one time - without realizing just what rocks and **hindrances had once been where now one travels as as if over a **smoothly-cut plank. We had to sweat and toil there before we **removed those rocks and hindrances, so one could go along nicely. (and we can see what a balanced individual Luther is