Replies

Strange that those who express disdain for theological research, and the oral tradition must now use a street theology. Don’t take it from me.

I'm sure you meant something useful here, but I have no clue what a "street theology" is, so your cleverness is lost on me. Sorry.

What did Martin Luther, the Protestant Reformer, state about the Bible? In his “Commentary On St. John,” he stated the following: “We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we have received It from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of It at all.”

Actually, the text you are attempting to cite is not from a commentary on John, but from one of Luther's sermons:

Yes, we ourselves find it difficult to refute it, especially since we concede—as we must—that so much of what they say is true: that the papacy has God’s Word and the office of the apostles, and that we have received Holy Scripture, Baptism, the Sacrament, and the pulpit from them. What would we know of these if it were not for them? Therefore faith, the Christian Church, Christ, and the Holy Spirit must also be found among them. What business have I, then, to preach against them as a pupil preaching against his teachers? Then there come rushing into my heart thoughts like these: “Now I see that I am in error. Oh, if only I had never started this and had never preached a word! For who dares oppose the church, of which we confess in the Creed: I believe in a holy Christian Church, etc.? Now I find this church in the papacy too. It follows, therefore, that if I condemn this church, I am excommunicated, rejected, and damned by God and all the saints

But what is now our defense? And what is the ground on which we can hold our own against such offense and continue to defy those people? It is nothing else than the masterly statement St. Paul employs in Rom. 9:7: “Not all are children of Abraham because they are his descendants.” Not all who bear the name are Israelites; or, as the saying goes: “Not all who carry long knives are cooks.” Thus not all who lay claim to the title “church” are the church. There is often a great difference between the name and the reality. The name is general. All are called God’s people, children of Abraham, Christ’s disciples and members; but this does not mean that they all are what the name signifies. For the name “church” includes many scoundrels and rascals who refused to obey God’s Word and acted contrary to it. Yet they were called heirs and successors of the holy patriarchs, priests, and prophets. To be sure, they had God’s Law and promise, the temple, and the priesthood. In fact, they should have been God’s people; but they practiced idolatry so freely under the cloak of the name “church” that God was forced to say: “This shall no longer be My temple and priesthood. My people shall no longer be My people. But to those who are not My people it shall be said: ‘You are sons of the living God

Thus we are also compelled to say: “I believe and am sure that the Christian Church has remained even in the papacy. On the other hand, I know that most of the papists are not the Christian Church, even though they give everyone the impression that they are. Today our popes, cardinals, and bishops are not God’s apostles and bishops; they are the devil’s. And their people are not God’s people; they are the devil’s. And yet some of the papists are true Christians, even though they, too, have been led astray, as Christ foretold in Matt. 24:24. But by the grace of God and with His help they have been preserved in a wonderful manner.

In the meantime we adhere to the distinction made here by Christ and do not regard as Christendom those who do not hold truly and absolutely to what Christ taught, gave, and ordained, no matter how great, holy, and learned they may be. We tell them that they are the devil’s church. On the other hand, we want to acknowledge and honor as the true bride of Christ those who remain faithful to His pure Word and have no other comfort for their hearts than this Savior, whom they have received and confessed in Baptism and in whose name they have partaken of the Sacrament. These are the true church. It is not found in only one place, as, for example, under the pope; but it exists over the entire earth wherever Christians are found. Outwardly they may be scattered here and there, but they meet in the words of the Creed: “I believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ, our Lord, who was born, suffered, and died for us on the cross.” In like manner, they pray: “Our Father who art in heaven.” They share the same Spirit, Word, and Sacrament. They all lead the same holy and blessed life, each one according to his calling, whether father, mother, master, servant, etc. Thus whatever we preach, believe, and live, this they all preach, believe, and live. Physically separated and scattered here and there throughout the wide world, we are nevertheless gathered and united in Christ

Hat tip to James Swan for the full discussion here: http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/11/luther-infallible-church-declared.html

So the quip you provided, as you can see, is significantly more favorable to Rome that what Luther actually said. Indeed, understood in context, Luther is mocking the grandiose pretensions of Rome, as the following paragraphs make clear. He is basically saying, why yes, they must be the source of everything we know about the Gospel, so who am I to oppose them. But the truth is, they are not the true source of that divine message. God is. They were mere caretakers, as Israel was, and not all in their membership are the true church, just as many in Israel were not true Israelites. And for their corruptions, idolatries, and rejection of God's truth, God has rejected them. But the faithful remnant remains, preserved by God Himself, some still under Rome, some not. And so we may understand that Luther here is giving them no more credit for the Scriptures than he gave the Pharisees, who, if you will recall, were the only group ever identified by Jesus as impossible to save, for their sin against the Holy Spirit was unpardonable. But at least they will have their fine education to keep them company.

Regardless of what non-Catholic Christians may think or say, according to secular, objective historians, the Catholic Church alone preserved Sacred Scripture throughout the persecution of the Roman Empire and during the Dark Ages.

All non-Catholic Christian denominations owe the existence of the Bible to the Catholic Church alone.

God choose the Catholic Church to preserve Scripture because it is His Church.

Again, if you would kind study up on Lampe's exhaustive and scholarly study, you would be able perhaps to see that what we "street theologians" have been saying all along has been proven out by one of your educational elites: Your alleged Petrine "office" never existed in old Rome as modern Rome defines it. Lampe has made a significant contribution to our understanding of the facts because he was willing to roll up his sleeves and really work at what others were only willing to blather on about. I can respect that.

Peace,

SR

“.......we adhere to the distinction made here by Christ.... and do not regard as Christendom those who do not hold truly and absolutely to what Christ taught, gave, and ordained, no matter how great, holy, and learned they may be..... We tell them that they are the devil’s church. .....On the other hand, we want to acknowledge and honor as the true bride of Christ those who remain faithful to ‘His pure Word’ and have no other comfort for their hearts than this ‘Savior’.......”

Oh how I love that we serve a God of Distinctions!

So the quip you provided, as you can see, is significantly more favorable to Rome that what Luther actually said. Indeed, understood in context, Luther is mocking the grandiose pretensions of Rome, as the following paragraphs make clear.

But taking things out of context is endemic to Catholicism.

They do it all the time with Scripture. Why not Luther as well?

>>And so we may understand that Luther here is giving them no more credit for the Scriptures than he gave the Pharisees, who, if you will recall, were the only group ever identified by Jesus as impossible to save, for their sin against the Holy Spirit was unpardonable.<<

That should be a sobering consideration for Catholics. Once again, excellent post.