Luther Didn't want seperation

[chickenutbread]

i know that to some, the truth of the Catholic Church is undeniably correct. but i just have a small thought.. why not look at outside sources besides catholic documents.. after all, that's only one viewpoint. if i were to do a report of some kinda, i'd have several sources of information. i'm not saying none of these are 100% reliable.. but diff sources do provide diff outlooks and views on the situation..

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

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.

Pope Leo excommunicated Luther (illegally, many state). Luther never excommunicated him. Pope Leo split the denomination he led and was responsible for, not Luther. Luther called himself "Catholic" (big "C") all his life. It's Catholics who invented and coined the phrase "Protestant" we didn't. I think you have the situation reversed.


And from the Protestant perspective, Luther did not leave the church. The Catholic denomination excommunicated him. Apples and oranges.



Thank you.


Pax!


- Josiah



.

 

[Tyndale]

It's Catholics who invented and coined the phrase "Protestant" we didn't. I think you have the situation reversed.


And from the Protestant perspective, Luther did not leave the church. The Catholic denomination excommunicated him. Apples and oranges.



Thank you.


Pax!


- Josiah



.

Didn't the Pope try to humiliate Luther by calling him a drunken rogue or something like that?

If the truth be said the Roman Catholic church was never really unified from their lavish beginnings when they obtained the Bishop of Romes chair. Those who disagreed were thrown out, humiliated and labeled heretics. It was only by using the word of god as the basis for the protest that Luther managed to maintain the credibility of the split. He submitted to certain dogma to save his life because he knew the Lord had a great bible translation awaiting.

The word of the Lord will prevail

 

[E.C.]

The problem that Rome has, is that in the beginning (Ecumenical Councils time) Rome was granted primacy among the other bishops because it was the capital of the Roman Empire. In time, this shifted to supremacy and consequently, some popes got a little big-headed.

 

[Shubunkin]

The issues were the filioque and the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome (the Western Church), which the RCC made those changes, and when they did, it became a different church. The schism in 1054 happened because of these changes, so therefore the RCC became a different church than the Eastern Orthodox when the schism happened, and a little before that. The EO did not change. Our liturgy goes back centuries past that even, and has its roots in the liturgy of the synogogs which go back further than Christ's day, and in fact in the OT with the use of incense, for example. We are Orthodox just as the Orthodox Jews called themselves Orthodox long before Christ, we are still Orthodox, only with Christ. That description goes back much further than 1054. The Eastern Orthodox Christianity has been around for 20 centuries.

Being a former Lutheran, I do understand that Luther did not want to break away from the RCC at first. He held on to many things the Catholic Church taught him. I understand that some Lutherans do not consider themselves Protestants.