Reformation Day: What the Original Protestant Actually Taught

Catholic Sistas ^ | 10/30/12 | Tiffany P

[Salvation]

For example:

"We are compelled to concede to the Papists
that they have the Word of God,
that we received it from them,
and that without them
we should have no knowledge of it at all."

~ Martin Luther

[Cronos]

well, the thing is the complexities of some things. Let's take a simple belief -- Jesus came from God

We believe that, but people believe it differently -- some posters here, Jehovah's Witnesses will point out texts that prove their point that Jesus was just a good point, others, SEventh Day Adventists will point out texts that He was the first created being but not God, and we have ideas similar to that spouted by posters of the "Messianic Jewish" or Modalist view

then there are many who reject the idea of the Trinity (the Modalists) with varied ideas -- from jehovah's witnesses to Oneness pentecostals to other views

[Cronos]

yup :)

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Cronos,
I wrote “every Christian” because the essence of a Christian is someone who has entrusted himself to the Gospel of Grace for salvation. There is no other path, no other Gospel, no other Savior who paid the full price of sin.

Any one who has not entrusted himself to this Gospel of Grace may belong to a Christian religion/denomination, but they are not a saint.

Luther was flawed. Of this we can be confident. Every man who walks the earth is also - except The Man.

Blessings to you.

ampu

[Salvation]

The rest of the text:

The original Christian Church built on Peter

Modern evangelical Protestants, when faced with Matthew 16:18-19 in which Jesus establishes the Church on Peter, have various different interpretations to explain this event taking place. The most common is that Jesus is establishing his Church—an invisible unit comprised of all saved Christians—on the faith of Peter, not on Peter’s himself or on his authority. They also have a myriad of interpretations of what the “keys” might be referring to. However, in one of Luther’s written works, The Keys, in Conrad Bergendoff, written five years after he left the Church, he acknowledges himself what many of his modern admirers deny:

“So we stand here and with open mouth stare heavenward and invent still other keys.  Yet Christ says very clearly in Matt 16:19 that he will give the keys to Peter. He does not say he has two kinds of keys, but he gives to Peter the keys he himself has and no others. It is as if he  [Christ] were saying:’ why are you staring heavenward in search of the keys?  Do you not understand I gave them to Peter? They are indeed the keys of heaven, but they are not found in heaven.  I left them on earth. Don’t look for them in heaven or anywhere else except in Peter’s mouth where I have placed them. Peter’s mouth is my mouth, and his tongue is my key case.  His office is my office, his binding and loosing are my binding and loosing’ ”

The Protestants’ disbelief that the Scriptures point to Jesus establishing a physical Church on Peter’s authority lead to a disbelief that the Catholic Church is the original Christian Church who first passed on Christian Teachings and canonized the New Testament Scriptures. While there are a number of different theories within evangelical Protestantism as to when the Catholic Church began and who the first pope was, Luther maintained that indeed, she is the historical Church of the apostles from which all other forms of Christianity derive:

“We concede — as we must — that so much of what they [the Catholic Church] say is true: that the papacy has God’s word and the office of the apostles, and that we have received Holy Scriptures, Baptism, the Sacrament, and the pulpit from them. What would we know of these if it were not for them?” (Sermon on the gospel of St. John, chaps. 14 – 16 (1537), in vol. 24 of Luther’s Works).

Mary

In an attempt to disassociate themselves with the Catholic veneration of Mary, modern evangelical Protestantism have gone to the other extreme, in which there is little public recognition of her and aside from Christmas time, where she seems to have been relegated to merely a minor role in the nativity story. Luther, if he were here today, would want nothing to do with such discarding of the woman whom he affectionately referred to as “the holy Mother of God …the woman who crushed the Serpent’s head” (sermon at Whittenburg, January 1546). What else did Luther, as a new Protestant teacher, have to say about the blessed Mother?

The Mother of all Christians:
“It is the consolation and the superabundant goodness of God, that man is able to exult in such a treasure. Mary is his true Mother … “(Sermon, Christmas, 1522)

“Mary is the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all of us even though it was Christ alone who reposed on her knees . . . If he is ours, we ought to be in his situation; there where he is, we ought also to be and all that he has ought to be ours, and his mother is also our mother.” (Sermon, Christmas, 1529).

Conceived without Sin:
“It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).

“She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin- something exceedingly great. For God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil.” (Personal {“Little”} Prayer Book, 1522).

Perpetual Virgin:
“Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary’s virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that.” (Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4, 1539).
“A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ . . .” (That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew, 1523).

Worthy of Respect:
“The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart.” (Sermon, September 1, 1522).

One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God’s grace . . . Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ . . . Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God. (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521).

The Eucharist

Historical writings from the early Church fathers make it plain that the first Christian Church believed in the literal presence of Christ in the Eucharist, when offered by a bishop or minister of the bishop. Despite such early writings, evangelical Protestants remain firm in the belief that Jesus was speaking metaphorically, encouraging his followers to take place in a symbolic memorial service with bread and wine. While Martin Luther had ninety-five problems with the Catholic Church, True Presence was not one of them.

Huldreich Zwingli was a reformer around Luther’s time who gained a band of followers from his proposition that the bread and wine only represents Christ. Luther forcefully disagreed, saying instead, “I would rather drink blood with the papists, than mere wine with the Zwinglians”. Further, he makes the bold assertion that only the devil would cause one to choose not to take to the clear words of Jesus in Scripture as literal, citing the early Church fathers as evidence:

“Who, but the devil, has granted such license of wresting the words of the holy Scripture? Who ever read in the Scriptures, that my body is the same as the sign of my body? or, that it is the same as it signifies? What language in the world ever spoke so? It is only then the devil, that imposes upon us by these fanatical men. Not one of the Fathers of the Church, though so numerous, ever spoke as the Sacramentarians: not one of them ever said, It is only bread and wine; or, the body and blood of Christ is not there present.” (–Luther’s Collected Works, Wittenburg Edition, no. 7 p, 391).

A common response from evangelical Protestants to all of the aforementioned words from Luther is along the lines of, “Why is it relevant that Luther thought those things? I don’t believe that his words are the Word of God, so I don’t have to believe everything he taught.”

The reason these quotes are relevant is because the same Protestants will also claim Martin Luther to have been driven by God in his personal interpretation of Scripture that concludes justification by faith alone and authority in Scripture alone. That then presses the question, how do they know Martin Luther was led by God in those areas, when they also believe him to be so wrong in others? Does it really stand to reason that the man who believed in so many tenants of faith that they strongly reject would be correct only in the areas of the ninety-five theses, even when the preceding 1500 years of Christianity never taught them? Further, if evidence shows that Martin Luther would not condone of the fundamentalist views of communion, Mary, and church history, then such Protestants must question the credibility of their faith community which is historically the result of several break-offs after the original Protestant reformer.

Luther lived to see the fruits of his work in spreading the belief that an established, authoritative priesthood is not necessary for Christianity. He observed, “There are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads; this one will not admit Baptism; that one rejects the Sacrament of the altar; another places another world between the present one and the day of judgment; some teach that Jesus Christ is not God. There is not an individual, however clownish he may be, who does not claim to be inspired by the Holy Ghost, and who does not put forth as prophecies his ravings and dreams.”

Luther’s philosophy that authority rests with the community of believers who interpret Scripture on their own, rather than the bishops of the original Christian Church, crumbles under his own admission. When each individual personal interprets Scriptures based on their own reader influence and convictions, the result is a plethora of denominations, sub-sects, and free-standing faith communities who are in disagreement with one another.

Today, there are worldwide tens of thousands Christian groups, all who claim to be Bible-believing and inspired by the Holy Spirit, yet contradict each other left and right. This disunity amongst Christ’s family is the largest effect brought about by today in history, Reformation Day, and arguably the most tragic to the Body of Christ.

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better.” –Martin Luther to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519

[AnalogReigns]

What a load or manure. Even the first sentence is a lie: “by nailing his ninety-five theses—protests against the Catholic Church” in that Dr. Martin Luther was a loyal son of the Roman Church and didn’t “protest” in the 95 Theses, rather questioned the very questionable practice—according to other loyal Roman Catholic theologians of the day—of indulgences—that is the selling of peoples souls out of purgatory—that was prevalent at that time.

The term “Protestant” has no relation to Luther’s 95 Theses, it is rather a term given to the German princes formal protest against Charles V demand that Evangelical followers of Luther all be arrested, tried and executed—and all their books be burned. This pejorative name was given some 12 years AFTER the 95 Theses.

The totally corrupt, sexually perverted, Pope Leo X was in on the local indulgence Luther’s 95 Theses objected to—so naturally did everything in his power to stonewall Luther & his theses, to shut him up.

How modern Roman Catholics can believe such lying propaganda as spewed in this “Catholic Sisters” posting, I have no idea.

Must be why also the great majority of Roman Catholics consistently vote Democrat.

[Cronos]

the essence of a Christian is someone who has entrusted himself to the Gospel of Grace for salvation. There is no other path, no other Gospel, no other Savior who paid the full price of sin.

And all orthodoxy has believed that from apostolic times.

Luther did not inaugurate a separation in that.

[Cronos]

"great majority" -- don't repeat a lie, AR. It's a sad 52% to 54% majority, yeah and we FR Catholics are working to reduce that, but it's by no means a "great majority"

And, needless to remind you, your insulting statement is read by FR Catholics -- and while you and I may be separated on dogmatic issues, on conservative social issues and being anti-democrat, we are on the same page. Ditto for the OP

[HarleyD]

And I doubt if you'll find many Protestants disregarding the 5 solae:

Scripture alone
Faith alone
Grace alone
Christ alone
Glory to God alone

I would say that the critical theological differences still remain.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Cronos... Luther distinguished that salvation comes entirely through the substitutionary death of Christ by God’s grace and apart from any human contribution of works, ritual etc., on our own part. Works will follow saving faith as the new life of Christ flows through our spirit.

While that may be taught in orthodox churches everywhere, I’ve come to realize that every church contains those who have entrusted themselves to Christ alone - and not their own works, and those who go through the motions of church, festivals, fasting, works etc., but sadly do not have saving faith. In many churches, the simplicity of the Gospel of Grace is obscured by the rituals, traditions and works that are taught. Many do not come to saving faith.

Blessings,
ampu

[marshmallow]

How modern Roman Catholics can believe such lying propaganda as spewed in this “Catholic Sisters” posting, I have no idea.

All I see in your post is an outburst over whether or not Luther was a "protestant".

Ironically, in your first sentence in which you called Luther "a loyal son of the Roman Church", you essentially confirm the author's overall point; namely that on many of the main tenets of the Christian faith, Luther's beliefs were/are drastically different from those found throughout modern Protestantism.

I think that's the main point of the article. And you appear to agree with it.

Thanks.

[Cronos]

salvation comes entirely through the substitutionary death of Christ by God’s grace and apart from any human contribution of works, ritual etc., on our own part.

And that is orthodox belief.

The simplicity yes, but as I said, even the simplicity of this has led to discussions -- "what if someone falls?" or "what of those who cannot (infants, mentally ill etc.)"