martin luther heretic or visionist


opinions on martin luther are welcome.


He should have stayed and reformed from within. The Church reformed, as it should have with the Council of Trent. He chose to leave instead. To answer your question: heretic.



He did not reform the abuses by local priests in Germany who misrepresented the Church teaching on indulgences. Those handful of priests were letting the people believe you can “buy your way” out of purgatory which the Church has never taught. That would have been an understandable place for reform within the Church. We have had great saints who are known as “reformers” of non-doctrinal matters.

The greatest error of Luther is that he created entirely new doctrines of “sola scriptura” and “sola fide” which are unbiblical and contradicted 1500+ years of Christian teaching. We were told by Jesus Himself that the “deposit of faith” would be protected by the Holy Spirit… And Luther took it upon himself to rewrite the teachings of the Apostles by inventing “Sola Scriptura” and “Sola Fide”.


To believe that we are “piles of dung covered in snow” is not what I would call a positive vision for humanity. God isn’t united in heaven with “piles of dung.”

Heretic, hands down.


piles of dung covered in snow
where is it that he said this?


Heretic… Although, I think it’s possible Luther may have started out with good intentions, but ended up compounding error upon error and now we have some 30,000 denominations. He destroyed the unity Christ prayed for and desired for His Church and He tossed aside the unity Saint Paul preached about.


I wish I had time to find a concise Catholic viewpoint on Luther. Perhaps there is an essay in the Catholic encyclopedia,, which summarizes his views and errors.

Clearly it seems thought, that he rejected the leadership of the Catholic Church. There was a program on the History channel about him, as I recall. He was dismayed about the opulence of Rome and he seemed to be revulsed by the decadence of the Pope and curia. There, too, he may have had a point.

Overall, he created and/or fostered a heretical schism based on his “scripture only” criticism of the Catholic Church. It doesn’t seem that this can be denied.

Arguably, the anti-Catholic hatred that he planted in Europe was very influential, and it was a strong basis for the French Revolution, the schism of Henry VIII of England, and even contributed to the rise of Nazism in Germany (and particularly its anti-semitism).

And, the intellectual movement he headed is still playing out today, with many protestant denominations still debating, between liberal and conservative branches, whether Luther went too far or didn’t go far enough. Undoubtedly the decline of Christianity in modern Europe with its widespread secularism and hatred/distrust of the Catholic Church is his lasting legacy. One can also lay at his feet the responsibility for some of the antipathy of Muslims for Christianity.

By the way: Martin Luther’s vision of what? You mean** *he wanted * ** all this division and rationalist rejection of the Church?


[quote=myfavoritmartin]piles of dung covered in snow
where is it that he said this?

He never actually used the word snow. He wrote that man was a pile of dung, and that God if he wanted to could adorn a pile of dung.


[quote=anawim]He should have stayed and reformed from within.

I agree completely with the above quote. If he would have stayed within the Church to work out his reformation, maybe we’d be referring to him today as St. Martin. Instead, he’s Martin the heretic.


[size=2]Hello myfavoritmartin,[/size]
[size=2]Luther boldly quotes Jesus words and teachings as the doctrine of his opponant. If one today opposes Jesus teaching then one can consider Luther a visionist. If one believes in Jesus and His teachings then Luther is a heritic.[/size]

Pleas visit the thread [size=2] Luther! Read Read![/size]

The doctrine of our opponents is similar to that of the false apostles in Paul’s day.Our opponents teach, "If you want to live unto God, you must live after the Law, for it is written, Do this and thou shalt live." NAB MAT 19:16
"Teacher, [font=Arial]what good must I do to possess everlasting life?" He answered, [/font]“Why do you question me about what is good? There is One who is good. [font=Arial]If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” [/font]NAB LUK 10:25
"Teacher, what must I do to inherit everlasting life?" Jesus answered him:****"What is written in the law? How do you read it?" He replied:

**"You shall love the Lord your God **
**with all your heart, **
**with all your soul, **
**with all your strength, **
**and with all your mind; **
and your neighbor as yourself."
Jesus said, “You have answered correctly. Do this and you shall live.


Myfavoritmartin, A good question is, what is your opinion of Martin Luther?

Where did he go right?

Where did he go wrong?



As for my two cents worth - Just to add the word “Alone” to the Bible, which completely changes the sentence, “Man is saved by Faith”, has caused more trials and tribulations than one man should be responsible for.

The Deuterocanonicals? Who gave him the authority to take them out of the canon???

And don’t get me started on deciding not to have James, Revelations, and other NT books in the Canon. He’s lucky his peers prevented that.


Notworthy Thanks for asking as you can see in my bio I was raised in a stricter version of lutheranism and have converted to baptist I am a believer in much of what **I feel ** where adjustments to catholic misrepresentation of scripture, His ongoing battles with johan tetzel and others commisioned by the pope are legendary, regarding indulgences, these were not in small sectors of the church rather in rome herself. I think a man willing to put his life on the line for his convictions in Christ is a man who has truly been moved by the holy spirit. As far as sola scriptura I personally find all the answers for all my questions about salvation right in the bible and don’t feel as though I would put the same trust in the traditions of man. But that’s me and I’m a layperson recently converted to baptist, so I’m sure some of you theologian or apologist are going to have a field day wiith this


not worthy one more thing, I agree I wish he would have stayed in the church and helped reform that is where he went wrong. I feel the anethema’s go a little to far and had he stayed there may have been a better reforming of the catholic church


“The greatest error of Luther is that he created entirely new doctrines of “sola scriptura” and “sola fide” which are unbiblical and contradicted 1500+ years of Christian teaching. We were told by Jesus Himself that the “deposit of faith” would be protected by the Holy Spirit… And Luther took it upon himself to rewrite the teachings of the Apostles by inventing “Sola Scriptura” and “Sola Fide”.”

Eden, that is perfect!!!

Thank you.

I have not read the posts after this, but I hope all have read at least your post, Eden.

Again, I want to thank you for such a clear idea.


I think a man willing to put his life on the line for what he believes in is a fanatic. That, in itself, is not bad, it just depends on what he believes in. Look at our jihadists, I have trouble admiring their devotion to God, since I feel it is so mis-placed.

Martin Luther truly started a noble thing. There was a problem, church wide, with indulgences. Not in every province, but far bigger than just Germany as someone else mentioned. Martin, as he should have, questioned and opposed this.

BUT… he should have only opposed the abuse of indulgences, not the doctrine of indulgences.

He shouldn’t have tried to re-create doctrines. Isn’t this duplicating the very magisterium you are questioning?

He should not have tried to remove and change a Bible that had been infallible canonized for over 1100 years (at the time).

I think Martin Luther began a noble quest and was soon swallowed up by the attention he was drawing. I draw a parallel with Cindy Sheehan, who has been used by the Liberals for their own purposes and Representative Murt (sic?), a war veteran, who is also being used by people with their own agenda. But that’s another thread.



quick ? apocrapha, are they canonical?


I am a Roman Catholic.

I believe the books of the Holy Bible because the bishops were inspired by the Holy Spirit to make them the Holy Bible.

Lutherans did not use faith or the Holy Spirit to decide the books of the Bible. They used scholarship–NOT FAITH. They, to use Biblical language, wanted to see (know) before they would hear (believe). They broke their own “doctrine” of only faith.

In fact the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod does not even have an official list of the books of the Holy Bible.

The Christians that teach only the Bible would have no Bible if that were the case because the Holy Bible never teaches which books belong in the Holy Bible.

Furthermore, which language for the Old Testament should we use? Greek or Hebrew.

No place in the Holy Bible does it say which language should be used. The New Testament makes use of the Greek Old Testament many times.

Where in the Holy Bible does it say: Only the Bible? (I am asking those who teach only the Bible.)

Where in the Holy Bible does it say: Only Faith? (I am asking those that teach only faith.)

Which manuscripts should we translate? The questions are endless.


[quote=myfavoritmartin]opinions on martin luther are welcome.

Martin Luther had some good points, such as ending abuses associated with indulgences, the Mass in the vernacular language, and lay communion under both species. Had he remained in Christ’s Church pursuing his reforms from within while maintaining due submission and obedience to the leadership of Christ‘s Church (Hebrews 13:17), he would probably be considered one of Church’s greatest saints. However, he let his pride get in the way and became the one of the most infamous heretics of Christ’s Church.


Hello myfavoritmartin,

No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.
Luther mocks and insults Jesus teachings to love God through obedience if we wish to enter into life through Him. Luther has lead centuries of billions of Christians to mock and oppose Jesus teachings.

NAB JOH 5:27
"The Father has given over to him power to pass judgment because he is Son of Man; no need for you to be surprised at this, for an hour is coming in which all those in their tombs shall hear his voice and come forth. Those who have done right shall rise to live; the evildoers shall rise to be damned." NAB REV 22:12
"Remember, I am coming soon! I bring with me the reward that will be given to each man as his conduct deserves. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End! **Happy are they who wash their robes so as to have free access to the tree of life **and enter the city through its gates Outside are the dogs and sorcerers, the fornicators and murderers, the idol-worshipers and all who love falsehood."

**NAB ROM 2:4 **

Do you not know that God’s kindness is an invitation to you to repent? In spite of this, your hard and impenitent heart is storing up retribution for that day of wrath when the just judgment of God will be revealed, when he will repay every man for what he has done: eternal life to those who strive for glory, honor, and immortality by patiently doing right; wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness. Yes, affliction and anguish will come upon every man who has done evil, the Jew first, then the Greek. But there will be glory, honor and peace for everyone who has done good, likewise the Jew first, then the Greek. With God there is no favoritism.NAB MAT 25:31
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’ Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ **And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." **
NAB JOH 12:47
"If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I am not the one to condemn him, for I did not come to condemn the world but to save it. Whoever rejects me and does not accept my words already has his judge, namely, the word I have spoken - it is that which will condemn him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own; no, the Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to speak. Since I know that his commandment means eternal life, whatever I say is spoken just as he instructed me."

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit