Who is Martin Luther and why was he excommunicated?

[JonNC]

Well stated. There certainly are Lutherans who pray the full Hail Mary; personally I have no problems with it. We know that holy Mary is in Heaven and that she prays for the Church so acknowledging with gratitude her role is acceptable to Lutherans.

I think there is a difference between acknowledging her, and requesting her intercession. It is at invocation that Lutherans typically draw a line. It is appropriate, however, to pray to the Father asking Him to listen to His saints’ prayers of intercession on our behalf.

Jon

 

[EvangelCatholic]

No problems…!

Right: the Pontifical Council is part of the Curia, as I’d also noted. Yet, this organization is sponsored by that council, and not part of it. I guess I’m sensitive, too – in this age of throwaway soundbites on the internet, misattribution is a pet peeve of mine!

The Joint Declaration is a very cool document – and very helpful for me, as a Catholic, since it enables me to show Christians of various denominations that the Church doesn’t believe things that they’ve been told we do!

Not sure what you mean by the Pontifical Council being sponsored by the Curia but not part of it? The joint Lutheran-Catholic statement on Martin Luther is over 30 years old and continues to represent the official stance of both Churches.

 

[Denise1957]

This is a link to another Catholic Encyclopedia article that references “the penalties that dated from Innocent III” which included confiscation of property.

"The representative of the Church were also children of their own time, and in their conflict with heresy accepted the help that their age freely offered them, and indeed often forced upon them. Theologians and canonists, the highest and the saintliest, stood by the code of their day, and sought to explain and to justify it. The learned and holy Raymund of Pennafort, highly esteemed by Gregory IX, was content with the penalties that dated from Innocent III, viz., the ban of the empire, confiscation of property, confinement in prison, etc. "

I am not accusing either side, or justifying the actions under discussion, just stating historical facts.

Quanophore, I was hoping that you would address my issue with your post to Topper, in that you didn’t say anything about the property that the popes supposedly confiscated as being from heretics or those who disobeyed. In reading your post to Topper, one would think that Popes had just confiscated the property of anyone they liked, and then jailed those who didn’t go along with it. The post seemed very anti-Catholic, IMO. More so than even the views of non-Catholics here.

 

[guanophore]

Quanophore, I was hoping that you would address my issue with your post to Topper, In reading your post to Topper, one would think that Popes had just confiscated the property of anyone they liked, and then jailed those who didn’t go along with it.

I am not sure what I said that gave that impression. There have been some exceedingly corrupt Bishops (not just in Rome) who would use any excuse to get retribution on their enemies or rivals, but from the historical documents I have read, this practice was carried out by secular rulers primarily who had the support of ecclesiastical authority. I have not read anything that indicated it was that arbitrary.

 

[Denise1957]

Confiscation of property was customarily used during all the inqusitions. Frequently the Pope aurhorized the local authorities who were involved in prosecuting offenders to take and keep the property of the accused. In 1183, at the time of the rampant Cathar heresy Duke Philip of Flanders, aided by William of the White Hand, Archbishop of Reims had the support of the Holy See to ravage these “heretics” as it was also considered a disruption of civil society to rebel against the Catholic faith . They caused many citizens in their domains, nobles and commoners, clerics, knights, peasants, spinsters, widows, and married women, to be burnt alive, confiscated their property, and divided it between them.

Where, on the link that you provide above, does it say anything about…

“They caused many citizens in their domains, nobles and commoners, clerics, knights, peasants, spinsters, widows, and married women, to be burnt alive, confiscated their property, and divided it between them.”

I can’t find in the article linked to, where what you stated above is shown at all. Could you please point out where it is, exactly?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I think there is a difference between acknowledging her, and requesting her intercession. It is at invocation that Lutherans typically draw a line. It is appropriate, however, to pray to the Father asking Him to listen to His saints’ prayers of intercession on our behalf.

Jon

Jon, any thoughts on the Angelus? It is prayed in Lutheran settings [retreat houses, seminaries]. How do Lutherans explain this?

Angelus
V. The angel of the Lord declared unto Mary,
R. And she conceived of the Holy Spirit.
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
V. Behold the handmaid of the Lord.
R. Be it done unto me according to thy Word.
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
V. And the Word was made flesh.
R. And dwelt amongst us.
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
V. Pray for us, O Holy Mother of God.
R. That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Let us pray: Pour forth, we beseech thee, O Lord, Thy grace into our hearts, that we to whom the incarnation of Christ Thy Son was made known by the message of an angel, may by His Passion and Cross be brought to the glory of His resurrection; through the same Christ our Lord.

R. Amen.[10]

 

[guanophore]

Where, on the link that you provide above, does it say anything about…

“They caused many citizens in their domains, nobles and commoners, clerics, knights, peasants, spinsters, widows, and married women, to be burnt alive, confiscated their property, and divided it between them.”

I can’t find in the article linked to, where what you stated above is shown at all. Could you please point out where it is, exactly?

It is about a third of the way down. Take part or all of the quote and use it to search the page. If you have a Windows web browser, you can hold down the Ctrl key, touch the “f” key and it will pull up a search window.

 

[JonNC]

Where, on the link that you provide above, does it say anything about…

“They caused many citizens in their domains, nobles and commoners, clerics, knights, peasants, spinsters, widows, and married women, to be burnt alive, confiscated their property, and divided it between them.”

I can’t find in the article linked to, where what you stated above is shown at all. Could you please point out where it is, exactly?

Hi Denise,
Maybe Guanophore was referring to this:

However, the imperial successors of Constantine soon began to see in themselves Divinely appointed “bishops of the exterior”, i.e. masters of the temporal and material conditions of the Church. At the same time they retained the traditional authority of “Pontifex Maximus”, and in this way the civil authority inclined, frequently in league with prelates of Arian tendencies, to persecute the orthodox bishops by imprisonment and exile. But the latter, particularly St. Hilary of Poitiers (Liber contra Auxentium, c. iv), protested vigorously against any use of force in the province of religion, whether for the spread of Christianity or for preservation of the Faith. They repeatedly urged that in this respect the severe decrees of the Old Testament were abrogated by the mild and gentle laws of Christ. However, the successors of Constantine were ever persuaded that the first concern of imperial authority (Theodosius II, “Novellae”, tit. III, A.D. 438) was the protection of religion and so, with terrible regularity, issued many penal edicts against heretics. In the space of fifty seven years sixty-eight enactments were thus promulgated. All manner of heretics were affected by this legislation, and in various ways, by exile, confiscation of property, or death. A law of 407, aimed at the traitorous Donatists, asserts for the first time that these heretics ought to be put on the same plane as transgressors against the sacred majesty of the emperor, a concept to which was reserved in later times a very momentous role. The death penalty however, was only imposed for certain kinds of heresy; in their persecution of heretics the Christian emperors fell far short of the severity of Diocletian, who in 287 sentenced to the stake the leaders of the Manichæans, and inflicted on their followers partly the death penalty by beheading, and partly forced labor in the government mines.

Jon

 

[Per_Crucem]

Many such people are amazed to learn that all the Reformers were Marian devotees, and that Luther kept saying his Rosary up until his death.

I pray it with my wife. Cause I know what’s good for me

 

[spina1953]

In researching Luther and some of the reasons as to why he was excommunicated it appears that because of Luther Tetzel became the victim of the most corrosive ridicule, every foul charge laid on his door, every blasphemous speech placed in his mouth, a veritable fiction and fable built about his personality, in modern history held up as the proverbial money bags and snake oil salesman denied even the support and sympathy of his own allies. Tetzel had to wait the light of modern critical scrutiny, not only for a moral rehabilitation but also for vindication as a soundly trained theologian and monk irreproachable deportment. it was his preaching at Juterberg and Zerbst, towns near Wittenberg, that drew hearers from there who in turn presented themselves to Luther for confession, that made him take the step he did then a year earlier, to post his 95 Theses in response to what Tetzel was doing.
The doctrines was open to misunderstanding by the laity; that the preach in the heat of rhetorical enthusiasm fell into exaggerated statements, on that the financial considerations attached, although were not obligatory, led to abuses and scandals. The opposition to indulgences, not to the doctrine which remains the same to today, but the mercantile methods pursed in preaching were not new. Duke George of Saxony prohibited them in his territory, which was where Tetzel was preaching on indulgences.

Tetzel more readily than some of the contemporary brilliant theologians saw the revolutionary import of the 95 Theses, which while ostensibly aimed at the abuse of indulgences, were a covert attach on the whole penitentical system of the CC and struck at the very root of ecclesiastical authority. Luther’s 95 Theses impresses the reader “as thrown together somewhat in haste,” rather ’ than showing carefully digested thought, and delicate theological intention; they “bear him ome moment into the audacity of rebellion and then carry him back to the obedience of conformity” (Beard,218,219).

Tetzel Theses opposed Luther’s innovations, the traditional teachings of the CC; Johann Eck, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ingoldstadt, acknowledged as one of the foremost theological scholars of his day, singled out no less than 18 of Luther’s Theses as concealing the grem of Hussite Heresy, violating Christian charity, subverting the order of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and breeding sedition. (Losches,op.cit.,II, 325).

What this is telling is that Luther was already forming new ideas concerning doctrines and how the CC should be ran long before Tetzel and indulgences sparked the flame Luther used to post his 95 Theses. Luther was forming contrary thinking long before 1519
, and even his professors told him that he was faulty in his thinking. No wonder that he was excommunicated in the end.

 

[JonNC]

Jon, any thoughts on the Angelus? It is prayed in Lutheran settings [retreat houses, seminaries]. How do Lutherans explain this?

I think it would be highly unusually, though not unprecedented, for Lutherans to use the Angelus as provided. Again, I am not condemning its use, but simply referring those reading to the fact that invocation of the saints in Heaven is not typically Lutheran.

From the Apology:

Although concerning the saints we concede that, just as, when alive, they pray for the Church universal in general, so in heaven they pray for the Church in general, albeit no testimony concerning the praying of the dead is extant in the Scriptures, except the dream taken from the Second Book of Maccabees, 15:14.

Moreover, even supposing that the saints pray for the Church ever so much, 10] yet it does not follow that they are to be invoked; although our Confession affirms only this, that Scripture does not teach the invocation of the saints, or that we are to ask the saints for aid. But since neither a command, nor a promise, nor an example can be produced from the Scriptures concerning the invocation of saints, it follows that conscience can have nothing concerning this invocation that is certain.

Jon

 

[pablope]

“Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now, and at the hour of our death.” is an invocation for intercession.

She is holy, she is the Mother of God, and she prays for sinners. All of these are true.

Invocation of the saints, however, is not typically part of Lutheran practice, though I do not oppose it.

Jon

Hmm…this brings up another scrupulosity/angst…the intercession of saints…but I cannot tell if this is a general Lutheran angst/scrupulosity or just limited to JonNC…

But I would say…it is a general Lutheran or protestant scrupulosity/angst…not to appear too “Catholic”…

 

[JonNC]

Hmm…this brings up another scrupulosity/angst…the intercession of saints…but I cannot tell if this is a general Lutheran angst/scrupulosity or just limited to JonNC…

It is a general Lutheran angst.

But I would say…it is a general Lutheran or protestant scrupulosity/angst…not to appear too “Catholic”…

Within American Lutheranism, we are seeing a turn from this, or maybe a greater comfort level with our own catholicity. Coupled with our evangelicalism (in the traditional sense, not the modern American sense), that’s a good thing. That said, I, and a few of my siblings, have come under criticism off and on here at CAF for the use of the term Evangelical Catholic, which I guess is understandable.

Jon

 

[FathersKnowBest]

I think there is a difference between acknowledging her, and requesting her intercession. It is at invocation that Lutherans typically draw a line. It is appropriate, however, to pray to the Father asking Him to listen to His saints’ prayers of intercession on our behalf.

Jon

See, I think that this is a practice that seeped into Lutheranism from the more radical protestantisms, and was not part of the original “reformation.” In some ways, it seems to be a tacit, “soft” denial of the Communion of Saints.

 

[JonNC]

See, I think that this is a practice that seeped into Lutheranism from the more radical protestantisms, and was not part of the original “reformation.” In some ways, it seems to be a tacit, “soft” denial of the Communion of Saints.

Well, its from the Augsburg Confession, so I’m not sure it was influenced by the radicals who were later, and it certainly is not a denial of the Communion of Saints which we believe, teach, and confess, but you are right in that it is “soft”, indeed tepid. This is why some Lutherans seem comfortable with invocation, and others don’t.
Now, some Lutherans may respond and say, “JonNC, invocation is not adiaphoron!” And they may be right, but I also don’t see it as the issue upon which the “church stands or falls” either. The facts are they pray for us, Luke 15:7 tells us they celebrate repentance, and the historic Church east and west both practice it.

Jon

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Well, its from the Augsburg Confession,

Nope. The AC doesn’t prescribe the practice you mentioned in the post to which I replied.

so I’m not sure it was influenced by the radicals who were later, and it certainly is not a denial of the Communion of Saints which we believe, teach, and confess,

Right. The AC acknowledges the CoS.

Now, some Lutherans may respond and say, “JonNC, invocation is not adiaphoron!” And they may be right, but I also don’t see it as the issue upon which the “church stands or falls” either.

Perhaps not. But I see it as akin to syncretism, an adoption of the later radical protestants’ beliefs and practices, if not in word, in deed.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Nope. The AC doesn’t prescribe the practice you mentioned in the post to which I replied.

Right. The AC acknowledges the CoS.

Perhaps not. But I see it as akin to syncretism, an adoption of the later radical protestants’ beliefs and practices, if not in word, in deed.

I think it would be more accurate to say, within the overall theology of the Augsburg Confession, that it argues against invocation of the saints as being a mandatory dogma which we are required to practice, more than it does forbidding the practice.

 

[JonNC]

=FathersKnowBest;12242767]Nope. The AC doesn’t prescribe the practice you mentioned in the post to which I replied.

Article XXI: Of the Worship of the Saints.

1] Of the Worship of Saints they teach that the memory of saints may be set before us, that we may follow their faith and good works, according to our calling, as the Emperor may follow the example of David in making war to drive away the Turk from his country. 2] For both are kings. But the Scripture teaches not the invocation of saints or to ask help of saints, since it sets before us the one Christ as the Mediator, Propitiation, High Priest, and Intercessor. 3] He is to be prayed to, and has promised that He will hear our prayer; and this worship He approves above all, to wit, that in all afflictions He be called upon, 1 John 2:1: 4] If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, etc.

Is this what you’re speaking of?

Perhaps not. But I see it as akin to syncretism, an adoption of the later radical protestants’ beliefs and practices, if not in word, in deed.

How so? How could the confessions adopt a later radical belief?

Jon

 

[guanophore]

Nope. The AC doesn’t prescribe the practice you mentioned in the post to which I replied.

Right. The AC acknowledges the CoS.

Perhaps not. But I see it as akin to syncretism, an adoption of the later radical protestants’ beliefs and practices, if not in word, in deed.

Recently I was listening to a spot on Catholic Radio about St.Anne, and thought about Luther’s experience:

• One day Luther was caught in a violent storm. Lightning struck a nearby tree. Luther fell to the ground in terror. He prayed frantically to St. Anne, the special saint for miners (at one- time his father had been a miner). He promised that if she would save his life, he would become a monk. At the age of 22, in spite of his father’s opposition, Luther entered a monastery in the Augustinian order. *

I wonder if he continued to invoke St. Anne, or other Saints?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Recently I was listening to a spot on Catholic Radio about St.Anne, and thought about Luther’s experience:

• One day Luther was caught in a violent storm. Lightning struck a nearby tree. Luther fell to the ground in terror. He prayed frantically to St. Anne, the special saint for miners (at one- time his father had been a miner). He promised that if she would save his life, he would become a monk. At the age of 22, in spite of his father’s opposition, Luther entered a monastery in the Augustinian order. *

**I wonder if he continued to invoke St. Anne, or other Saints?/**QUOTE]

Good question that we may not know the answer and that fact gives Catholics insight into how Lutherans view the Company of Saints and the blessed Virgin Mary, in particular. We do know that Luther prayed the rosary. We also know that there are Lutheran churches in Europe that hold the relics of saints * and that people pray before these shrines in Lutheran cathedrals. Lutheran parishes, especially in Europe, have statues of the St Mary, St Anne, etc. Do Lutherans merely honor these saints with their images? Probably.

As Jon has stated, the issue is left as a pious gesture rather than a dogma. Lutherans, in general, do not invoke the saints but we do mention several, especially the Virgin Mary in our Liturgy each Sunday.*