Luther Didn't want seperation

[Renton405]

I was reading on CF and came across a snippet of a quote of Luther saying:

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. St, Peter and St. Paul, forty-six Popes, some hundreds of thousands of martyrs, have laid down their lives in its communion, having overcome Hell and the world; so that the eyes of God rest on the Roman church with special favor. Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church. On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better. We must not separate from God on account of any work of the devil, nor cease to have fellowship with the children of God who are still abiding in the pale of Rome on account of the multitude of the ungodly. There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to dissolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body. For love can do all things, and nothing is difficult to those who are united.”

Martin Luther to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519
more than a year after the Ninety-Five Theses
quoted in The Facts about Luther, 356[/I]




This quote really brought some things into perspective into what maybe the man was really trying to do. Since he was mostly responsible for schisming the church yet this is not what he wanted.. Do you think many protestants didn't follow in the steps as to what Luther really wanted in those days?? maybe as a result of extremism of people after him.. I have a feeling if he saw all the different denominations that can't agree on doctrine he would frown at what has happened..


So all the pastors who demoninze the CC don't realize their founding father said:

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. "

something for people to think about

 

[chickenutbread]

the main reason Martin Luther started Protestantism was to protest the corrupt popes and indulgences.. the way Protestantism is now, i can't really argue with anything. i guess i'm biased, but i'm just really tired of how some Protestants & Catholics & other demoninations kinda say "oh, they're wrong" or not exactly put down, but look down on others' doctrines. and another thing i'm wondering: why is it that Catholicism & Protestantism have been able to survive the centuries and still exist today? i believe that God's working in both. i don't think it quite matters what doctrine you believe in (although it's good to have a stable church family and clear cut rules) but rather personal relationship with God.

 

[Renton405]

the main reason Martin Luther started Protestantism was to protest the corrupt popes and indulgences.. the way Protestantism is now, i can't really argue with anything. i guess i'm biased, but i'm just really tired of how some Protestants & Catholics & other demoninations kinda say "oh, they're wrong" or not exactly put down, but look down on others' doctrines. and another thing i'm wondering: why is it that Catholicism & Protestantism have been able to survive the centuries and still exist today? i believe that God's working in both. i don't think it quite matters what doctrine you believe in (although it's good to have a stable church family and clear cut rules) but rather personal relationship with God.

actually protestanism is still pretty infant..

the Catholic church has existed over 20 centurys...

the protestant churches have existed almost 5..

Quite a difference..

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I'm really glad to see someone posted this.

I think the Protestant Reformation, however much a triumph against corruption and for the gospel of faith alone and grace alone, is also a great tragedy. I abhore schism, and would like nothing better than to find myself again in communion with Mother Church and the Holy See of Rome.

I cannot do so for reasons of good conscience (I could not swear allegience to all the doctrines promulgated by the magesterium), but I very much stand in the tradition that hopes against hope for reunification.

Might I also say that Benedict XVI is awesome...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

actually protestanism is still pretty infant..

the Catholic church has existed over 20 centurys...

the protestant churches have existed almost 5..

Quite a difference..

I will always prefer "Christ-ian church"

Hebrew 12:22 But, ye came to Mount Zion, and to a city of the living God, to the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of messengers, 23 to the company and assembly of the first-born in heaven enrolled, and to God the judge of all, and to spirits of righteous men made perfect, 24 and to a mediator of a new covenant--Jesus,

 

[freespiritchurch]

You have to read that quote in historical context. In 1520, he wrote:

"While denying the divine authority of the papacy, I still admitted its human authority. But after hearing and reading the subtle subtleties of these pretentious and conceited men, with which they skillfully prop their idol — for in these matters my mind is not altogether unteachable — I now know of a certainty that the papacy is the kingdom of Babylon and the power of Nimrod the mighty hunter. Once more, therefore, that all may fall out to my friends' advantage, I beg both booksellers and readers to burn what I have published on that subject and to hold to this proposition:


THE PAPACY IS THE MIGHTY PREY OF THE ROMAN BISHOP.

It would be more accurate to say that Luther didn't want separation until 1520.


Alan

 

[kimber1]

i think Luther probably has rolled over in his grave countless times seeing what happened. i think it's sad that he didn't intend to have happen and now it's a mess.

 

[PaulAckermann]

I have just read an excellent book called "The Roots of the Reformation" by Karl Adam. This book has been approved by both Catholics and Lutherans.

What it pointed out was that Luther was heavily infuenced by a theologian named William of Occam. William's view of Catholicism was very legalistic. Being influenced by William Luther was obsessed by his guilt before he came up with his view of justification by faith alone. After he did find his doctrine, he attacked the CC because he asscociated William of Occam's legalism with Catholicsm. Unlnown to Luther, the CC had condemned the teachings of William of Occam.

So the Reformation was built on a misunderstanding. Luther's attack on the CC should have been directed against William of Occam, the true instigator of Catholic legalism, which was never accepted by the Catholic Church.

 

[stumpjumper]

So the Reformation was built on a misunderstanding. Luther's attack on the CC should have been directed against William of Occam, the true instigator of Catholic legalism, which was never accepted by the Catholic Church.

That's really not very accurate. I would get my money back for that book

Regardless of where you stand, there were some real abuses (especially in the Church in Northern Germany) that Luther was disputing. And this is obviously shown to be true with the internal counter-reformation that occurred with the Catholic Church at Trent as well...

If there were no abuses and questionable teachings, why was there a counter-reformation?

 

[Uphill Battle]

I was reading on CF and came across a snippet of a quote of Luther saying:

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. St, Peter and St. Paul, forty-six Popes, some hundreds of thousands of martyrs, have laid down their lives in its communion, having overcome Hell and the world; so that the eyes of God rest on the Roman church with special favor. Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church. On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better. We must not separate from God on account of any work of the devil, nor cease to have fellowship with the children of God who are still abiding in the pale of Rome on account of the multitude of the ungodly. There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to dissolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body. For love can do all things, and nothing is difficult to those who are united.”

Martin Luther to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519
more than a year after the Ninety-Five Theses
quoted in The Facts about Luther, 356[/I]




This quote really brought some things into perspective into what maybe the man was really trying to do. Since he was mostly responsible for schisming the church yet this is not what he wanted.. Do you think many protestants didn't follow in the steps as to what Luther really wanted in those days?? maybe as a result of extremism of people after him.. I have a feeling if he saw all the different denominations that can't agree on doctrine he would frown at what has happened..


So all the pastors who demoninze the CC don't realize their founding father said:

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. "

something for people to think about

or, perhaps, he was turfed? If he didn't want schism....

 

[stumpjumper]

I was reading on CF and came across a snippet of a quote of Luther saying:

You might enjoy this article: The Catholic Luther

 

[Uphill Battle]

actually protestanism is still pretty infant..

the Catholic church has existed over 20 centurys...

the protestant churches have existed almost 5..

Quite a difference..

this old chestnut again?

 

[Tyndale]

actually protestanism is still pretty infant..

the Catholic church has existed over 20 centurys...

Protestantism is a principle belief, not a church or creed or canon.

If the roman church excisted for over 20 centurys, why does the Anglican and Orthadox churches claim they were the original Catholic church?

 

[Iollain]

actually protestanism is still pretty infant..

the Catholic church has existed over 20 centurys...

the protestant churches have existed almost 5..

Quite a difference..

Yes and there is quite a difference in the fact the Peter would fall over backwards and faint if he knew of how the Church he helped start has changed.

 

[Hadassah]

So all the pastors who demoninze the CC don't realize their founding father said:

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. "

something for people to think about

Not everyone within Protestantism are left overs of Lutheranism.

Remember there are groups such as the Anabaptists and Baptists which came long before Luther... and there are other groups still which were split long before the reformation.

It warrants more study than just these few quotes to put Luther, or any of the fathers of the reformation into perspective.

In other words, I don't see it really.

The first schism came with the Jerusalem Council and then there were others thereafter, even leading up to the eventual formation of the Catholic Church...
There were other schisms as well.

We can't really garner an accurate picture without taking all things into account and going from there.

I have to admit I need more study on the matter myself, I missed a few things coming up with the history material I had as course work from 6th to 12th and I followed up on my own with studies in History that interested me, up to and including more church history and more history on the Reformation on into WWII.. something certainly not weighed into heavily with my Mennonite History books.

 

[stumpjumper]

Unlnown to Luther, the CC had condemned the teachings of William of Occam.

Occam's teachings were also never formally condemned as far as I can find out... Regardless, strict monasticism and legalism was not exactly Luther's main complaint...

 

[Confess]

the main reason Martin Luther started Protestantism was to protest the corrupt popes and indulgences.. the way Protestantism is now, i can't really argue with anything. i guess i'm biased, but i'm just really tired of how some Protestants & Catholics & other demoninations kinda say "oh, they're wrong" or not exactly put down, but look down on others' doctrines. and another thing i'm wondering: why is it that Catholicism & Protestantism have been able to survive the centuries and still exist today? i believe that God's working in both. i don't think it quite matters what doctrine you believe in (although it's good to have a stable church family and clear cut rules) but rather personal relationship with God.

Nope. He was a reformer, not a protestant. He was trying to reform the Catholic church to teach what it USED to teach.

There is no protesting in trying to get the church to do what it used to do.

The others like Zwingli and Calvin etc., WERE protestants who rejected and created new doctrines. They protested the truth teachings and created false ones.

 

[Confess]

I have just read an excellent book called "The Roots of the Reformation" by Karl Adam. This book has been approved by both Catholics and Lutherans.

What it pointed out was that Luther was heavily infuenced by a theologian named William of Occam. William's view of Catholicism was very legalistic. Being influenced by William Luther was obsessed by his guilt before he came up with his view of justification by faith alone. After he did find his doctrine, he attacked the CC because he asscociated William of Occam's legalism with Catholicsm. Unlnown to Luther, the CC had condemned the teachings of William of Occam.

So the Reformation was built on a misunderstanding. Luther's attack on the CC should have been directed against William of Occam, the true instigator of Catholic legalism, which was never accepted by the Catholic Church.

This is whole heartily incorrect. There are so many more things which Luther fought for, not just legalisms. JUSTIFICATION being the biggest one. Whole doctrines that the church perverted. Doctrines what was once accepted in the CC but since was distorted.

 

[Tyndale]

Not everyone within Protestantism are left overs of Lutheranism.

Remember there are groups such as the Anabaptists and Baptists which came long before Luther... and there are other groups still which were split long before the reformation.

It warrants more study than just these few quotes to put Luther, or any of the fathers of the reformation into perspective.

In other words, I don't see it really.

The first schism came with the Jerusalem Council and then there were others thereafter, even leading up to the eventual formation of the Catholic Church...
There were other schisms as well.

We can't really garner an accurate picture without taking all things into account and going from there.

I have to admit I need more study on the matter myself, I missed a few things coming up with the history material I had as course work from 6th to 12th and I followed up on my own with studies in History that interested me, up to and including more church history and more history on the Reformation on into WWII.. something certainly not weighed into heavily with my Mennonite History books.

Well said HadassahSukkot.

1 Cor 11:18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. 19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

 

[Renton405]

Yes and there is quite a difference in the fact the Peter would fall over backwards and faint if he knew of how the Church he helped start has changed.

And how do you know that? Do you speak for the dead? Did you die, go to heaven, talk with Peter, and then came back down to tell us??