Who is Martin Luther and why was he excommunicated?

[EvangelCatholic]

Truthfully it would take too long to explain why it is that I’m not at all departing from the catechism. But I’ll just say briefly of course everyone who is baptized in the Trinitarian formula is a baptized Catholic since there is only one True Church. But the Lutheran church is not a member of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. There is no salvation outside the true church. The exceptions are baptism of desire. Baptism of blood and invincible ignorance. But a person must have an informed conscience and refrain from using ones own judgment.#1783 of the CCC.

Annie

Annie

When you write the above you are no longer speaking for the Catholic Church and, in-fact are disrespecting the holy Father, in my opinion. That is what I find quite troubling. Your opinion of the Lutheran-Catholic Commission on Unity, the outgrowth of the Dialogues/ Declaration started by Pope John 23, appears to be in blaring conflict with the Catholic Church.

The illogic of some posts, coupled with contempt suggests provocation for the Hell of it!

 

[Denise1957]

You may wish to reject the teachings of the Catholic Church on this point, Topper, and that is your perogative, but your position is in direct contradiction to the catechism.

There is only One Church, and all those who have been incorporated into Christ are members of His One Body.

818 “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers… All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”272 (1271)

Perhaps you should explain what the Catholic Church teaches in regards to Lutherans being members of His One Body. The quote provided above does not state that Lutherans are members of His One Body, but maybe you can provide another official and authoritative source which states this. Maybe I missed it somewhere.

My understanding is that they are not full members. If they were, they would be able to partake of Catholic sacraments, but they aren’t able to do so. I think that it would be more accurate to say that they are in an imperfect communion with the Catholic Church. But by their baptism (which uses essentially the same formula as the CC), Lutherans are considered as true Christians, as the quote you provided above states.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Perhaps you should explain what the Catholic Church teaches in regards to Lutherans being members of His One Body.

My understanding is that they are not full members. If they were, they would be able to partake of Catholic sacraments, but they aren’t able to do so. I think that it would be more accurate to say that they are in an imperfect communion with the Catholic Church. But by their baptism (which uses essentially the same formula as the CC), Lutherans are considered as true Christians, as the quote you provided above states.

Allow me to attach from forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=902983&page=20

Originally Posted by **House Harkonnen **
Sure. My sojourn was ten years, and my catechesis was pathetic. I had to teach myself the faith through this website and other sources such as reading the CCC, and other books. Even so I can get behind probably 85 percent of the CCC. That’s not enough for unity. Unity for me would be full agreement.

EvangelCatholicI think that is a very honest statement that reflects most Lutherans. The ecumenical excitement often isn’t front page news in the parish bulletin. Lutherans are in an awkward position. By signing JDDJ, we acknowledge the supremacy of the Church of Rome and the steps toward full communion.

---

 

[Denise1957]

Allow me to attach from forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=902983&page=20

I’m not seeing the connection between what I wrote, and your response to it above. Could you clarify?

 

[spina1953]

I’m not seeing the connection between what I wrote, and your response to it above. Could you clarify?

Hi Denise 1957: I did not see the connection either when I went to it in response to your post and also would like clarification.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I’m not seeing the connection between what I wrote, and your response to it above. Could you clarify?

Sorry

I believe I have provided you direct links to material posted on the Holy See website.
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

 

[Denise1957]

Sorry

I believe I have provided you direct links to material posted on the Holy See website.
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

Where in the document provided does it address my post to Guanophore regarding Guanophore’s assertion that Lutherans are members of His One Body? Could you point out where the document says this, if that’s what you’re inferring?

We’ve been through this before, but I don’t mind mentioning it again. When providing a document as a source, it would be helpful to point out where in a particular document that it addresses the discussion point. That’s pretty much how we debate on a forum. We can’t be expected to read an entire document and then figure out how it relates to the topic at hand. You need to p(name removed by moderator)oint the area that is relevant to the discussion. Thank you.

 

[TertiumQuid]

I had an inkling it was from a different work when I couldn’t find that passage, but didn’t say anything for fear I was looking through inaccurate or incomplete translations. Psalm 58 is correct; vindication is a swell thing. Perhaps the original error-maker just saw the shared year and similar topic and made an assumption. Hopefully, it wasn’t an intentional conflation; that’d be bad history. Whatever the case, Luther’s use of bombastic rhetorical device ought to be obvious even without the proper context or documentation, and his later explanation removes all doubt.

I’ve looked into this quote off and on over the years. “On the Papacy at Rome” is probably a sort of reference to the title of a book by the Dominican Sylvester Prierias in which Luther responded to. WA 6 gives Luther title to his book as Epitoma Responsionis ad Marinum Lutherum. The quote appears on page 347 as part of Luther’s postscript (Ad Lectorem).

In regard to Luther’s rhetorical style, a lot of people miss this- there’s not much point to quibble with people over Luther’s rhetorical words. The goal of going through particular quotes is not to defend Luther as a Protestant saint. I see the study of any person in church history as an exercise in the love of God and neighbor. How do I love my neighbor in the study of church history? There probably are many ways, but the one that applies here is in my words. If I bear false witness against my neighbor, even if he’s been dead for hundreds of years, I am not loving him. I say let the people in church history be exactly who they were, warts and all. Luther certainly had warts and sins, but he did not “kick the cat” as well on the way to posting the 95 Theses. That is, he is not as bad as many portray him to be.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Where in the document provided does it address my post to Guanophore regarding Guanophore’s assertion that Lutherans are members of His One Body? Could you point out where the document says this, if that’s what you’re inferring?

We’ve been through this before, but I don’t mind mentioning it again. When providing a document as a source, it would be helpful to point out where in a particular document that it addresses the discussion point. That’s pretty much how we debate on a forum. We can’t be expected to read an entire document and then figure out how it relates to the topic at hand. You need to p(name removed by moderator)oint the area that is relevant to the discussion. Thank you.

You want me to prove you are wrong in Catholic teaching?
I’m responsible for finding information from the Pope?

OK, maybe a refresher course would help

1. What follows for the relations between our churches from the analysis above, supported by the biblical and historical explanations that follow below? Building upon the earlier Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogues, Eucharist and Ministry and Facing Unity,156 we propose steps toward a full, mutual recognition and reconciliation of our ministries and the ultimate goal of full communion. We are aware of common challenges to overcome. Nevertheless, the mutual recognition of ministries need not be an all-or-nothing matter and should not be reduced to a simple judgment about validity or invalidity. In order to assess the degree of our koinonia in ordained ministry, a more nuanced discernment is needed reflecting the way that an ordained ministry serves the proclamation of the gospel and the administration of the sacraments, stands in continuity with the apostolic tradition, and serves communion among churches.
   usccb.org/beliefs-and-tea…-salvation.cfm

The Church as Koinonia of Salvation: Its Structures and Ministries

1. We recommend that our churches recognize the real but imperfect communion among our ministers and encourage appropriate forms of pastoral collaboration between our ministries. Specifically, we propose:

that common activities among Lutheran and Roman Catholic bishops be promoted in order to signify the level of communion that exists between them, such as regular joint retreats, co-authored pastoral letters on topics of mutual concern, and joint efforts on matters of public good;

that mutual activities be intensified among ordained ministers, such as regular retreats, homily or sermon preparation study, participation in non-eucharistic prayer services and weddings, and common sponsorship of events or services in the life of the church, including as appropriate other leadership ministries;

that the faithful, in light of their common baptism into the people of God, engage together in catechesis, evangelization, peace and justice ventures, social ministry, and attendance at each other’s diocesan and synodical assemblies; and

that social ministry organizations, educational institutions, chaplaincies, and other church agencies engage together in activities that further the gospel and the common good.
usccb.org/beliefs-and-tea…-salvation.cfm

Lutherans can also grant the beneficial role of the papacy at various periods of history. Believing in God’s sovereign freedom, they cannot deny that God may show again in the future that the papacy is his gracious gift to his people. Perhaps this might involve a primacy in which the pope’s service to unity in relation to the Lutheran churches would be more pastoral than juridical. The one thing necessary, from the Lutheran point of view, is that papal primacy be so structured and interpreted that it clearly serve the gospel and the unity of the church of Christ, and that its exercise of power not subvert Christian freedom.
usccb.org/beliefs-and-tea…al-primacy.cfm

Even so, Catholics will have to take seriously and answer the Lutheran question. If Catholics hold that the Lord’s Supper celebrated in Lutheran churches has “because of the lack [defectusl of the sacrament of orders… not preserved the genuine and total reality [substantial of the Eucharistic mystery”,268 does that not, after all, show that they regard the episcopal office in historic succession as the regular transmitter of the ordained ministry in the church, and so indirectly as necessary for salvation? Catholics must answer that an ecclesiology focused on the concept of succession, as held in the Catholic Church, need in no way deny the saving presence of the Lord in a eucharist celebrated by Lutherans.

Catholics and Lutherans together understand that the communion with God mediated through word and sacrament leads to communion of the faithful among themselves. This takes concrete shape in the communion of the churches: the one holy catholic and apostolic church, the una sancta of the, creed is realized in the communio ecclesiarum as local, regional and universal communion, and so as church fellowship.
prounione.urbe.it/dia-int…urch3.html#3.4

[/quote]

 

[Denise1957]

You want me to prove you are wrong in Catholic teaching?
I’m responsible for finding information from the Pope?

OK, maybe a refresher course would help

Okay…you obviously don’t intend to address the specific question that I addressed to guanophore, so I’ll wait for his response.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

LUTHERAN—ROMAN CATHOLIC DIALOGUE
TEACHING AUTHORITY AND INFALLIBILITY IN
THE CHURCH

Lack of Christian faith would and should so preclude. But the operative presumption is that Christian faith sufficient for Eucharistic sharing exists in the case of Catholics and Orthodox despite the inability of the latter to accept all these particular dogmas. We believe that this presumption regarding Christian faith should be extended also to Lutherans. If so, it would not thereby follow that limited Eucharistic sharing was justified in their case too. But it would follow that such sharing ought not to be ruled out because of Lutheran failure to accept these three teachings.
ts.mu.edu/readers/content…0.1/40.1.5.pdf

1. The question of the reality of the presence of Jesus Christ in the Lord’s
   Supper is not a matter of controversy between Catholics and Lutherans.
   The Lutheran–Roman Catholic dialogue on the eucharist was able to
   state: »The Lutheran tradition affirms the Catholic tradition that the
   consecrated elements do not simply remain bread and wine but rather
   by the power of the creative word are given as the body and blood of
   Christ. In this sense Lutherans also could occasionally speak, as does
   the Greek tradition, of a change« (Eucharist 51).50 Both Catholics and
   Lutherans »have in common a rejection of a spatial or natural manner
   of presence, and a rejection of an understanding of the sacrament as
   only commemorative or figurative« (Eucharist 16).51
   Common

LUTHERAN—ROMAN CATHOLIC DIALOGUE
TEACHING AUTHORITY AND INFALLIBILITY IN
THE CHURCH

1. A step in this direction was taken by Vatican II, which permitted limited Eucharistic sharing between Catholics and Orthodox, even though the latter do not normally accept (and even at times explicitly reject at least one or more of) the dogmas in question. The situation of the Orthodox and Lutherans, though different in many ways, is similar at least in the following: both find themselves for the most part unable to accept one or more of these teachings as part of the deposit of faith. If this inability on the part of the Orthodox does not preclude all Eucharistic sharing with Catholics, the same inability on the part of Lutherans should not of itself do so either.
   ts.mu.edu/readers/content…0.1/40.1.5.pdf

48.Catholic and Lutheran Christians together confess the real and true presence of the Lord in the Eucharist.

56.Catholic and Lutheran Christians together recognize that in the Eucharist Jesus Christ “is present as the crucified who died for our sins and rose again for our justification, as the once-for-all sacrifice for the sins of the world”.42

62.Lutheran and Catholic Christians confess together that in the Eucharist the body and blood of the Lord are really received, either for salvation or for condemnation (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:27-29). They confess that the believing reception of the eucharistic bread and wine gives personal union with Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior They also agree that the efficacy of believers reception of the Lord cannot be measured by human standards but belongs to the sphere of the free and humanly uncontrollable action of God.
raadvankerken.nl/fman/3246.pdf

1. Thus, Lutherans and Catholics are able jointly to conclude, »Therefore
   regarding Scripture and tradition, Lutherans and Catholics are in such
   an extensive agreement that their different emphases do not of them-
   76 Chapter IV
   selves require maintaining the present division of the churches. In this
   area, there is unity in reconciled diversity« (ApC 448).82

 

[Porknpie]

There is truly no point in beating dead (ha!) horses. Most of us live in the present.

This thread has me thinking back 25 years ago when I got married to an Evangelical Catholic in an Evangelical Catholic Church (w/dispensation). This EC wife of mine did eventually make her way into the Roman Catholic Church. But during that process of conversion, both inside and outside of RCIA, the man, Luther, was never really a subject of discussion. What we did discuss was the nature of the Church Christ established, the belief in seven Sacraments, and few things such as Papal Infallibility and the nature of Marian devotion. As such we were living in the present.

PnP

 

[TertiumQuid]

First of all, how, specifically and exactly (of course), did Tetzel actually ‘provoke’ Luther? A few pages earlier Brecht reviews, in general, the 95 Theses. He mentions Thesis # 27, which is as follows: “27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.” Luther, “95 Theses” “The phrase ‘as soon as the coin in the coffer rings the soul from purgatory springs’ is also extremely questionable.” Brecht, pg. 194
Here Brecht admits what virtually every reputable Scholar (Protestant and otherwise) now understands, that Tetzel never said ‘as soon as the coin…….”. This means that Luther was mistaken about how Tetzel was preaching the Indulgence. Had he not gone off half-cocked but had bothered to actually make sure of the facts of the matter, he would not have made this mistake, and maybe, just maybe, without the misperception of a ‘provocation’ by Tetzel, possibly Luther might not have started the ‘Reformation’.

This is a mis-reading of page 194. Brecht isn’t saying this at all. Rather, Brecht is describing what Luther is saying in Theses 27-29. Simply go and read Theses 27-29, and also note that in context, Brecht is describing Luther’s points section by section in the 95 Theses. It’s Luther saying that the phrase is questionable!

On page 182 Brecht explains that the phrase, “As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs” had been around as early as 1482. I don’t recall a discussion from Brecht in this section exactly as to whether Tetzel said it or not.

Regardless, while Tetzel may not have coined the phrase, he certainly taught it’s sentiment.

 

[spina1953]

In my research on Tetzel it appears that Luther never met the man. It also seems that it was by hearsay that Luther got whatever he though Tetzel was doing. Also there were those who were selling indulgences and modern scholars have determined that Tetzel got a bad rap on the question of indulgences. Tetzel was one of the first to question Luther’s 95 Theses when he wrote 106 Theses against Luther’s sermon Indulgence and Grace which in turn caused Luther to attack Tetzel. Tetzel was a Dominican and Luther was an Augustinian and they were jealous of each other and mistrusted each other which may also have been a cause of Luther’s disparaging remarks against Tetzel.

 

[TertiumQuid]

In my research on Tetzel it appears that Luther never met the man. It also seems that it was by hearsay that Luther got whatever he though Tetzel was doing. Also there were those who were selling indulgences and modern scholars have determined that Tetzel got a bad rap on the question of indulgences. Tetzel was one of the first to question Luther’s 95 Theses when he wrote 106 Theses against Luther’s sermon Indulgence and Grace which in turn caused Luther to attack Tetzel. Tetzel was a Dominican and Luther was an Augustinian and they were jealous of each other and mistrusted each other which may also have been a cause of Luther’s disparaging remarks against Tetzel.

I think it’s great you’re doing your own research on Tetzel. Which sources are you using? I’m always looking for new sources. Which “modern scholars” do you mean?

Thanks.

 

[Annie39]

This thread has me thinking back 25 years ago when I got married to an Evangelical Catholic in an Evangelical Catholic Church (w/dispensation). This EC wife of mine did eventually make her way into the Roman Catholic Church. But during that process of conversion, both inside and outside of RCIA, the man, Luther, was never really a subject of discussion. What we did discuss was the nature of the Church Christ established, the belief in seven Sacraments, and few things such as Papal Infallibility and the nature of Marian devotion. As such we were living in the present.

PnP

I am a “revert” to the Catholic Church during my wandering in the desert I was a member of the Lutheran Church (LCMS). the Holy Spirit did not lead me Home through learning these things about Luther either. It is interesting to learn the different circumstances in many peoples that the Holy Spirit does use to lead people home. Perhaps if a person out there in the cyber-world stumbles on to this thread it may be just the information that the person needs to move him along towards the Truth. If CAF did not have the variety of different threads filled with people eager to share the faith and explain and defend our wonderful faith I too would find this thread inappropriate but there is so very much at this banquet called CAF that I personally don’t find it out of line.

Annie

 

[spina1953]

I think it’s great you’re doing your own research on Tetzel. Which sources are you using? I’m always looking for new sources. Which “modern scholars” do you mean?

Thanks.

Hi Tertium Quid: I use Bing search on Tetzel and check all the scholarly woks there is. One is Tetzel’s Vorlung a refutation of Luther’s sermon on Indulgences and Grace. It seems that over the years from just before Tetzel died in Leipzig during the 1519 Debate He was accused of many things and so far really do not know just how much of it was true since there seems to be a considerable amount of propaganda concerning Tetzel even by Scholars in the centuries after Tetzel’s death. I have to say that is a long drawn out process in finding as much on Tetzel whether it is Protestant or Catholic sources. One sometimes just has to read everything and then determine what is worthless and those that have merit in being truthful. I will let you look through and do your own research on him so that you can decide for yourself what you might think comes close to the truth as possible. I am still working on finding modern authors who have written on Tetzel that I can read in full.

 

[spina1953]

I am a “revert” to the Catholic Church during my wandering in the desert I was a member of the Lutheran Church (LCMS). the Holy Spirit did not lead me Home through learning these things about Luther either. It is interesting to learn the different circumstances in many peoples that the Holy Spirit does use to lead people home. Perhaps if a person out there in the cyber-world stumbles on to this thread it may be just the information that the person needs to move him along towards the Truth. If CAF did not have the variety of different threads filled with people eager to share the faith and explain and defend our wonderful faith I too would find this thread inappropriate but there is so very much at this banquet called CAF that I personally don’t find it out of line.

Annie

Hi Annie39: I think you make a great point that maybe someone will come by and read a post on CAF and it just might be the thing that leads one to the CC. and the truth.

 

[guanophore]

As a Catholic, you submit to the wisdom of the Catholic Church in discernment of who should and who should not be a priest or professor. Here you come down with a very Martin-Luther-sounding arrogant condemnation of that wisdom and a revolt of your own against the Catholic Church, doing what you condemn Luther for doing. The Church, you say here, was wrong, and you are the better judge.

I would suggest you print off your posts on this thread and take them to your local priest or spiritual director for review and comment.

If you post again on this thread, I suggest a humble and contrite apology for your posts.

You make a very good point here Tomi. The faults we see in others are most often the ones that lie in ourselves. It is much easier to see the speck in the eye of another rather than deal withour own log.

Anytime we are provoked, annoyed, or very upset by another, it is likely that their actions are triggering something in ourselves that needs to be dealth with. Jesus’ wisdom in telling us to love our enemies acknowledges that, in loving them, we are learning to face our own shortcomings and learn from them.

 

[guanophore]

Perhaps you should explain what the Catholic Church teaches in regards to Lutherans being members of His One Body.

I have nothing to post that is more relevant and accurate than what the CCC states about our separated brethren who have been validly baptized and strive to walk with Christ. I am sure there are validly baptized Lutherans who do not practice their faith, just as there are Catholics. Only God can see the heart. But I know plenty of Lutherans that are more obedient to Christ than some lapsed and rebellious Catholics.

The quote provided above does not state that Lutherans are members of His One Body, but maybe you can provide another official and authoritative source which states this. Maybe I missed it somewhere.

Yes, I believe you did miss it.

My understanding is that they are not full members. If they were, they would be able to partake of Catholic sacraments, but they aren't able to do so.

There is only one Church, Denise, so all those who are baptized into Christ are baptized into His One Body. Yes, it is an imperfect union, but the catechism is clear that we are siblings in Christ.

It is a wound to unity to accuse them and hold them at fault for things the founders of their ecclesial communities said and did.It is also against the forum rules.