Uphill Battle
Well-Known Member
- Apr 25, 2005
- 18,279
- 1,221
- 48
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
such as?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.
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
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..
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
Oh, and again, Luther is the "founding father" of nothing. Jesus is the founder of the church. CFW Walther is generally regarded as the founder of my denomination - but we don't equate our denomination with the one holy catholic and apostolic church (we do believe that the Christians associated with our denomination are members of His church, however). And Luther did not START anything. You keep getting this turned about - he was illegally excommunicated. The Pope split his denomination. Lutherans lemented that.
as in denied those?Justification, transubstantiation, purgatory etc.
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
Knowledge3 said:The excommunication was legal.
He disobeyed his superiors and broke a long list of rules in the CC.
Where are referenced documents and sources that provide historical proof for claiming that the excommunication was "illegal" >?
Roman Catholicism: 10 centuriesactually protestanism is still pretty infant..
the Catholic church has existed over 20 centurys...
the protestant churches have existed almost 5..
Quite a difference..
EmperorConstantine said:Anyway, I've been told that Luther's original intention was to start up a church. I've been told that the formation of a new church was just circumstantial and not Luther's original intention.
However, after some small bits of reading and so forth, I'm more inclined to think that Luther's original intention was not to form a new church but to diminish the corruption in the Roman Catholic Church. However, since the Roman popes have a bit of history of supremacy, this stalled any thought of change. In 1517, the Roman Church needed to change because of corruption and because of straying away from the Early Church's way of life, thus digging deeper and deeper into error.
But that's just me.
Roman Catholicism: 10 centuries
Protestantism: 5 centuries
Orthodox: 20 centuries.
All numbers are rounded.
I don't believe EO as it is now is the same as it was in the first century.
Maybe not the exact same (example: Nicene Creed which was not "drafted" until the 4th century) but I like to think that it more resembles the Early Church than others.I don't believe EO as it is now is the same as it was in the first century.
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?
Roman Catholicism: 10 centuries
Protestantism: 5 centuries
Orthodox: 20 centuries.
All numbers are rounded.
A lot of this really depends on who you talk to. Some of the more conservative Orthodox would say the pope is as heretical as Arius while others would say that Rome is just greatly in error.And to say that the western church did not start until the 10 century does not make sense, either. If the western church only started in the 10th century, that that means the Roman patriarch's (the pope) succession did not start until the 10th century. This would make his succession invalid. But why would his be invalid and not the eastern patriarchs?
I do not have the book with me, but I recall him quoteing for Luther where he himself said that the abuses in the Catholic Church were not a justification for leaving the church.
Luther's dispute with the Church were based on doctrinal reason, not abuses. Luther knew enough of church history and the fallenness of man to know that the church will always fall into corruption and abuses.
The abuses in the church made the message that Luther was preaching more acceptable to the masses. The common people were more accepting to the idea of leaving the church because of its abuses. But Luther himself did not believe it that abuses in the church justifies leaving the church.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?