Why I could never follow Luther.

[rinnie]

I was thinking of this all day and wonder how others feel about it.

Luther came AFTER the Church. Now scriptures said the Church is One, Holy, Catholic,and Apostolic.

Now on a common sense level Luther separated himself from the ONE Church. Now we come into the battle who has the ONE Church. It has to be the Church that was started by Peter.

Now here is where the problem with Luther comes in my mind. Luther was at one time a part of the Church started by Peter. Simply because, he walked away from the Church that History proves was connected to Peter. Here is where common sense comes to play, Peter and the CC were here long before Luther, Luther was not here long before the CC.

Now in my eyes it shows how Luther walked away from Jesus because Jesus said the Church and I are ONE. and there is ONE HCAC,

Now rather there was sin going by humans in the RCC at that time or not has nothing to do with the OHCAC.

I mean do People really think that Peter did not have Sin, that John didn’t, Etc. We know they did because of the repentance that they continued to do all of their lives.

Now the RCC is considered the Church that is led by the Pope. (the present Peter). Now the Catholic Church is universal. Which mean one, all are welcome, all can become one in Christ through Christ with Christ who is the Church.

Now I have heard that there is no such thing as the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH! Now that is not true. Now granted the Church is not Roman but it is called the Roman Catholic Church, has been forever.

Now Luther was at one time part of the RCC. Now if the Church is one, and was here long before Luther how could there possibly be more than One Church?

Please no disrespect anyone, just trying to figure out their line of reasoning on this?

 

[Bluegoat]

Luther considered himself to still be part of the catholic church. He felt that the hierarchy of his day had separated itself from the Church through false teachings and immoral practices.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Luther considered himself to still be part of the catholic church. He felt that the hierarchy of his day had separated itself from the Church through false teachings and immoral practices.

Thank you for posting this. I was thinking the same thing.

 

[KathleenGee]

Alot of blame can be placed on Leo X. If he were voted out, the problems with Luther could have been resolved.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Alot of blame can be placed on Leo X. If he were voted out, the problems with Luther could have been resolved.

ummm, wasnt he the Pope? 'Cause the Pope cant be “voted out” any more than I can be “voted out” of Christendom…

 

[Bluegoat]

ummm, wasnt he the Pope? 'Cause the Pope cant be “voted out” any more than I can be “voted out” of Christendom…

Maybe in the sense of “never voted in”? Or in some sort of Medici-like poisoning kind of way?

 

[campeador]

If I was born Lutheran, I’d probably be Lutheran.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Maybe in the sense of “never voted in”? Or in some sort of Medici-like poisoning kind of way?

lol, did you really just advocate poisoning the Pope? lol, that is crazy!

And “never voted in”… Catholics take the understanding that the priesthood, bishopric, etc. is a vocation and therefore God-sent.

 

[Bluegoat]

lol, did you really just advocate poisoning the Pope? lol, that is crazy!

And “never voted in”… Catholics take the understanding that the priesthood, bishopric, etc. is a vocation and therefore God-sent.

Well, some say John VIII was poisoned - I was by no means advocating poisoning anyone.

There are of course processes by which one ends up as Pope, so we can always imagine that such a thing might have come out differently. I don’t know what the method was in those days, though there were popes that were there by means of family power and influence.

 

[MarianD]

And “never voted in”… Catholics take the understanding that the priesthood, bishopric, etc. is a vocation and therefore God-sent.

I highly doubt scum like Alexander VI was God-sent.

The priesthood is a vocation. One is made a Bishop by the Pope. One is made Pope by an election. The priesthood is the only vocation that one achieves due to God alone. The others you mentioned are positions God allows people to have due to the authority He has granted His Church, but these positions aren’t directly appointed by God. Even then, some of the people chosen by the Pope/elected by Cardinals to be shepherds causes God to shake His head (not literally of course) because of how bad these people are, but He still allows it and He allows us to suffer the consequences for such poor decisions.

 

[SteveVH]

I was thinking of this all day and wonder how others feel about it.

Luther came AFTER the Church. Now scriptures said the Church is One, Holy, Catholic,and Apostolic.

Now on a common sense level Luther separated himself from the ONE Church. Now we come into the battle who has the ONE Church. It has to be the Church that was started by Peter.

Now here is where the problem with Luther comes in my mind. Luther was at one time a part of the Church started by Peter. Simply because, he walked away from the Church that History proves was connected to Peter. Here is where common sense comes to play, Peter and the CC were here long before Luther, Luther was not here long before the CC.

Now in my eyes it shows how Luther walked away from Jesus because Jesus said the Church and I are ONE. and there is ONE HCAC,

Now rather there was sin going by humans in the RCC at that time or not has nothing to do with the OHCAC.

I mean do People really think that Peter did not have Sin, that John didn’t, Etc. We know they did because of the repentance that they continued to do all of their lives.

Now the RCC is considered the Church that is led by the Pope. (the present Peter). Now the Catholic Church is universal. Which mean one, all are welcome, all can become one in Christ through Christ with Christ who is the Church.

Now I have heard that there is no such thing as the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH! Now that is not true. Now granted the Church is not Roman but it is called the Roman Catholic Church, has been forever.

Now Luther was at one time part of the RCC. Now if the Church is one, and was here long before Luther how could there possibly be more than One Church?

Please no disrespect anyone, just trying to figure out their line of reasoning on this?

Well, Luther didn’t leave the Church voluntarily. He was excommunicated. In my opinion he had some very valid issues to contend with. I won’t pretend to know the details of his excommunication, but I’m sure someone on the forum does. IMO, it was what happened after he was excommunicated that bothers me; Rejecting the deuterocanonical books and attempting to throw out James and the Book of Revelation, among others; The notion of private interpretation; and, believing that he had any authority to administer the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist. He was a priest and should have known better.

St. Francis encountered great corruption in his time as well but transformed the Church from within by his own holy example while remaining faithful and obedient. He made bishops weep at their own sinfulness through his preaching and transformed their lives as well.

My understanding is that Luther was well intentioned in weeding out corrupt practices and if we are to be honest, they were rampant during that period. He certainly crossed the line at some point, however, or he would not have been excommunicated. Maybe someone can fill in the details.

 

[KathleenGee]

Well, I put in the word ‘vote’…my take…my priest talked about Pope X last night…terrible man…some cardinals were going to work to remove him, but instead he locked them up in a tower and had a Muslim take them out…de medici…

Some thing to look up…albeit I put this out…

And the priest said all baptized Christians are Catholic…essentially. So when they want to return to the Church, they go through a very simple process, profess the Creed and that is it…

So how could they remove this Pope???

 

[Le_Cracquere]

Well, it comes down to definitions; I’m afraid this is yet another situation where Catholics and Protestants are both using English, but aren’t speaking the same language.

By and large, Protestants are unfamiliar with the assertion that the temporal Catholic Church necessarily equals the Church of the scriptures, and such an equation isn’t at all obvious to them. Some cradle Catholics might think I’m kidding, but I swear I’m not. If one shares Rinnie’s assumptions of a Church “that History proves was connected to Peter,” “has been forever,” that is a uniquely legitimate descendant from Apostolic times, etc., then his/her argument’s ironclad. If not, the entire OP comes off like a lengthy exercise in question-begging.

So like you, Rinnie, I mean no disrespect, but in light of Protestants’ different assumptions (whether those are right or wrong), do you see that their line of reasoning isn’t all that odd or mysterious? I hope that helps answer your question.

 

[Nicea325]

I was thinking of this all day and wonder how others feel about it.

Luther came AFTER the Church. Now scriptures said the Church is One, Holy, Catholic,and Apostolic.

Now on a common sense level Luther separated himself from the ONE Church. Now we come into the battle who has the ONE Church. It has to be the Church that was started by Peter.

Now here is where the problem with Luther comes in my mind. Luther was at one time a part of the Church started by Peter. Simply because, he walked away from the Church that History proves was connected to Peter. Here is where common sense comes to play, Peter and the CC were here long before Luther, Luther was not here long before the CC.

Now in my eyes it shows how Luther walked away from Jesus because Jesus said the Church and I are ONE. and there is ONE HCAC,

Now rather there was sin going by humans in the RCC at that time or not has nothing to do with the OHCAC.

I mean do People really think that Peter did not have Sin, that John didn’t, Etc. We know they did because of the repentance that they continued to do all of their lives.

Now the RCC is considered the Church that is led by the Pope. (the present Peter). Now the Catholic Church is universal. Which mean one, all are welcome, all can become one in Christ through Christ with Christ who is the Church.

Now I have heard that there is no such thing as the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH! Now that is not true. Now granted the Church is not Roman but it is called the Roman Catholic Church, has been forever.

Now Luther was at one time part of the RCC. Now if the Church is one, and was here long before Luther how could there possibly be more than One Church?

Please no disrespect anyone, just trying to figure out their line of reasoning on this?

Now on a common sense level Luther separated himself from the ONE Church. Now we come into the battle who has the ONE Church. It has to be the Church that was started by Peter.

Actually the church was founded and started by Jesus and continued by Peter and all His followers.

 

[raumzeitmc2]

My understanding is that Luther was well intentioned in weeding out corrupt practices and if we are to be honest, they were rampant during that period.

… and thanks to Luther, even more rampant among him and his followers!

He certainly crossed the line at some point, however, or he would not have been excommunicated. Maybe someone can fill in the details.

Maybe start by reading pp. 302-326 of Grisar’s Luther, vol. 4.

 

[yosupman]

I think JPII has admitted that both sides were to blame. JPII has stressed the first step to reconciliation is holiness. Catholics must lead holy lives. We are most to blame when we disfigure the face of Christ.

 

[Newbie2]

If I was born Lutheran, I’d probably be Lutheran.

I was and I’m Catholic now.

Well, Luther didn’t leave the Church voluntarily. He was excommunicated. In my opinion he had some very valid issues to contend with. I won’t pretend to know the details of his excommunication, but I’m sure someone on the forum does. IMO, it was what happened after he was excommunicated that bothers me; Rejecting the deuterocanonical books and attempting to throw out James and the Book of Revelation, among others; The notion of private interpretation; and, believing that he had any authority to administer the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist. He was a priest and should have known better.

St. Francis encountered great corruption in his time as well but transformed the Church from within by his own holy example while remaining faithful and obedient. He made bishops weep at their own sinfulness through his preaching and transformed their lives as well.

My understanding is that Luther was well intentioned in weeding out corrupt practices and if we are to be honest, they were rampant during that period. He certainly crossed the line at some point, however, or he would not have been excommunicated. Maybe someone can fill in the details.

There’s a lot that went on back then; it wasn’t as simple as Luther just being the bad guy as you suggest. What started the whole thing was Luther’s good intentions toward reform, which, when one looks at what he set in motion, he partially accomplished.

On the other hand, he among others set in motion the whole Reformation movement, which spiraled out of hand, which is not what he originally intended.

In all liklihood there was pride and arrogance on both sides, significant miscommunication and intemperate choice of words. Luther was undoubtedly not an easy person to get along with.

I think JPII has admitted that both sides were to blame. JPII has stressed the first step to reconciliation is holiness. Catholics must lead holy lives. We are most to blame when we disfigure the face of Christ.

No doubt both sides had a hand in it. If there were inside reform efforts underway, Luther may not have felt the need to do what he did.

 

[Oldtimer_7]

A few questions for my Catholic brothers:
If you were excommunicated, would you stop believing in God and in Jesus as Savior?
If you still believed, would you continue to pray and to worship?
If you continued to pray and worship, would you seek out the company of others who also worshiped God, even if it were outside the Church?
If you did these things, would you tell others of God’s plan of salvation and of Jesus’ role in it?

 

[Newbie2]

A few questions for my Catholic brothers:
If you were excommunicated, would you stop believing in God and in Jesus as Savior?
If you still believed, would you continue to pray and to worship?
If you continued to pray and worship, would you seek out the company of others who also worshiped God, even if it were outside the Church?
If you did these things, would you tell others of God’s plan of salvation and of Jesus’ role in it?

Perhaps, but if you’re giving a list of what Luther did, you stopped short.

 

[JonNC]

=rinnie;7190220]I was thinking of this all day and wonder how others feel about it.

Luther came AFTER the Church. Now scriptures said the Church is One, Holy, Catholic,and Apostolic

.
Not sure what you mean, rinnie, Luther came AFTER the Church, but every Lutheran would agree that the Church is one, holy, catholic and apostolic.

Now on a common sense level Luther separated himself from the ONE Church. Now we come into the battle who has the ONE Church. It has to be the Church that was started by Peter.

We would dispute that he separated himself from Christ’s Church, but if we were to accept your contention, we would say he certainly had help from Rome.

Now here is where the problem with Luther comes in my mind. Luther was at one time a part of the Church started by Peter. Simply because, he walked away from the Church that History proves was connected to Peter. Here is where common sense comes to play, Peter and the CC were here long before Luther, Luther was not here long before the CC.

We would dispute that he walked away, rather he was pushed, but were we to accept your contention, would you say the same about Orthodoxy?

Now in my eyes it shows how Luther walked away from Jesus because Jesus said the Church and I are ONE. and there is ONE HCAC,

Should I accept this as a claim that any Christian not in communion with the Bishop of Rome have walked away from Christ?

Now rather there was sin going by humans in the RCC at that time or not has nothing to do with the OHCAC. I mean do People really think that Peter did not have Sin, that John didn’t, Etc. We know they did because of the repentance that they continued to do all of their lives.

So did Luther.

Now the RCC is considered the Church that is led by the Pope. (the present Peter). Now the Catholic Church is universal. Which mean one, all are welcome, all can become one in Christ through Christ with Christ who is the Church.

We all become one with Christ and part of His Church through Baptism. No?

Now I have heard that there is no such thing as the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH! Now that is not true. Now granted the Church is not Roman but it is called the Roman Catholic Church, has been forever.

This is not the case.

Now Luther was at one time part of the RCC. Now if the Church is one, and was here long before Luther how could there possibly be more than One Church?

This is a good question,considering the schism.

Please no disrespect anyone, just trying to figure out their line of reasoning on this?

With the exception of the implication that those not in communion with the Bishop of Rome are not with Christ, no offense taken, rinnie. I have never found you to be intentionall disrespectful.

Jon