One of the biggest problems is people wanting to exist in their own bubble.
Were Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin and Mussolini products of their times and experiences? How would one view those who resisted them and even died in their hands? Were those resisted these people not also products of the same times and experiences? The same goes for slave owners and abolitionists… Where is conscience during these times or anytime? Is conscience a product of times and experiences too?
By your logic, we can not judge Hitler either because no one really knows if he expressed remorse, or reconciled with God—even though there was no evidence that he repented. So, in your opinion, who really was Hilter? Was Hitler even evil? By the way, anti-Semitic did not start with Hitler either.
Luther wanted to abolished the papacy and the Holy Orders. He called popes and bishops “fools”—among other choiced names. What would be left of the Catholic Church without popes, bishops and priests? Who would administer the sacraments? Who would say Mass and consecrate the Eucharist? Aren’t all of these amount to the destruction of the Catholic Church? As for Luther’s Church is a continuation of the Catholic Church? What does that even mean? If Luther chose to leave the Catholic Church, why would he even want to “continue” the Catholic Church?
No one said that members, or those in the Hierarchy, of the Catholic Church are without sins. We are all sinners. What Catholics should not do is to submit to heresies and leave the Church. Luther was right in pointing out the abuses in the Church. They were in fact sins committed by members of the Church. No one disputes that. It is important to note that, had Luther chosen to work with the Church to correct those abuses, I believe he would have been a great reformer. But, instead, he submitted himself to heresies and left the Church on his own free will—leaving Pope Leo X no choice but to excommunicate him.
Council of Trent did call out Martin Luther by name and condemned the heresies that he espoused. But the Council also dealt with other important issues and contents (the sacraments, the Mass, justification, salvation, heresies, Biblical canon, etc…) It took the Council Fathers 18 years to finish their work.
Of course, sins must be acknowledged by all sides for reconciliation to occur. True ecumenism guides souls to the truth of Christ and to the Church—not away from the Church.
I agree except for this, In his 95 Thesis he also trashed Transubstantiation among other things that I am not as well versed in. Transubstantiation isn’t an abuse.
God Bless You
Thank you for reading.
Thank you for pointing that out. I wanted to say, in general, the abuses—not all 95 theses listed—were sins. Transubstantion is certainly not a sin.
Which one? Here they are.
He trashed nothing in the 95 Theses. They were debate points, not a doctrinal state. They are mostly about the abuses of indulgences
I mean why join a Catholic church when you can join a church named after Luther.
So that makes Eck’s anti-Judaic writings okay ?
I repeat, Luther was a heretic. Eck was not. Luther founded his own church. Eck did not.
You mean why join the ROMAN Catholic Church.
Do you see how that works? One petty little flippant remark gets another. It doesn’t add to the conversation.
The fact is both of those names have their origins in slurs devised by opponents. And in both instances, members essentially adopted the name.
The Evangelical Catholic Churches that we now know as Lutheran consider themselves Catholic, as well. And whether or not you like it or approve of it is irrelevant.
Great. Your support for Eck’s writings is noted
Actually, whatever Lutheran churches consider themselves is pretty much irrelevant to the fullness of the truth.
As you see it. You’re welcome to your opinion
Luther led millions astray. Nothing to celebrate there.
Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276
Baptized and confirmed in the catholic faith found in the Lutheran Tradition, and continuing in that faith in the Anglican tradition, I am anything but “led astray”. I celebrate the work of the Spirit in me.
You know that Hank, not Marty, is the flawed vessel draws my interest, so I’m no expert, but I was wondering about that assertion.
Do you mean the claim that he attacks Transubstaniation?
It is actually a new one that I’ve not heard. So, I await on the edge of my seat for clarification
The arch heretic Luther came over the course of his life to decide that he did not believe in the dogma of transubstantiation.
Yep. I read it here first, that it was a member of the 95.
Perhaps “product” is not quite accurate, but we are all influenced by the culture in which we live, and the experiences of our lives.
shaped, influenced. Some people were raised to have more of a conscience.
Conscience is very much shaped by our life experiences. This is why it is so important for us to form our conscience according to our faith. All of us have had some deficits in conscience formation, some more than others.
I would say the evidence suggests that he did not, since he took his own life, but we are not in a position to see the heart of anyone, even our own, so we cannot judge. Only God can do that.
We can judge them by their fruits, and he certainly produced a lot of evil fruit. Good fruit comes from a good tree.
Oohh. Arch-heretic now. Thanks for the update.
That he did not accept Transubstaniation (or consubstantiation) is well known