Lutheran Ping!
Be rooted in Christ!
Posted on 08/24/2015 6:08:28 PM PDT by marshmallow
The city approves an initiative to honour the Reformer that challenged the ‘capital of Catholicism’ five centuries ago. Politicians waited for the approbation of Vatican authorities.
Rome will have its own ‘Piazza Martin Lutero’ in the centre of the city. The Italian capital approved an initiative proposed by the Union of the Seventh Day Adventist Churches back in 2009. Vatican authorities have not opposed the project, evangelical sources said.
“Next September 16 at 17.00, will take place the naming of a square in Rome to the German reformer Martin Luther, close to the Colosseum”, Stefano Bogliolo, board member of the Italian Evangelical Alliance, told Evangelical Focus.
(Excerpt) Read more at evangelicalfocus.com ...
——Where Luther’s at it’s probably pretty hot. Fiery you might say.——
How would you know...?
Do you purpose to sit on God’s judgement seat...
Adventists honoring LUTHER in ROME? Can we assume the square will be closed on Saturday?
1] The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom].
2] Secondly, he adds also that by divine right he has both swords, i.e., the authority also of bestowing kingdoms [enthroning and deposing kings, regulating secular dominions etc.].
3] And thirdly, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. And for these reasons the Roman bishop calls himself [and boasts that he is] the vicar of Christ on earth.
4] These three articles we hold to be false, godless, tyrannical, and [quite] pernicious to the Church.
Has anything changed since 1580? If so, what, besides the apparent fact Rome is now willing to accord a square for the pigeons?
If you'd read anything about him, you'd know he was conflicted because he loved the Church but hated the corruption. He tried to help them see their need for reformation but they were blinded by their lusts and greed.
No, Luther opposed some really horrible practices and man made traditions. One specifically was that Luther opposed the burning of heretics. Funny, the RCC defended the practice against Luther. There are even Catholics today that approve of the practice and wish Luther would have burned.
Luther’s writings on the Jews were abhorrent, but before getting all haughty and spouting off, I caution you to consider the source of Luther’s anti-Semitism. He was a Catholic priest who was educated by Rome and lived in a society dominated by Rome. Moreover, Luther was roughly 34 when he hammered the 95 Theses to the Wittenberg Door and only lived to age 62, not near long enough to rid himself of the cultural detritus, superstitions, errors, and heresies it had taken Rome more than a millennia to accumulate.
No
Luthiers main opposition was the thought that one could pay enough to get to heaven and that someone could intercede on their behalf.
Ping
Ping
“How would you know...?”
Apparently your reading comprehension skills are lacking.
Well stated, and received in full and without prejudice. Thank you.
“If you’d read anything about him, you’d know he was conflicted because he loved the Church but hated the corruption.”
Actually I’ve read several dozen volumes about him and at least 50 that he wrote. I still remember by heart the call number for the translated series of his books: BR 330. E5 1955. Luther seems to have hated corruption when he wasn’t getting a piece of the action - like when he lived in a seized monastery as a private home.
“He tried to help them see their need for reformation but they were blinded by their lusts and greed.”
No. Everyone - and I mean EVERYONE - saw the need for reforming some practices. The problem was that Luther created new doctrines no one ever heard of before. This is why McGrath, a well known Evangelical historian and theologian, could refer to one of Luther’s teachings as a novum (a novelty, a new thing). Yeah, that was in one of the books I read and you probably have never even heard of.
Be rooted in Christ!
“No, Luther opposed some really horrible practices and man made traditions. One specifically was that Luther opposed the burning of heretics.”
Actually Luther avidly supported the execution of those he considered heretics such as the Anabaptists. Gee, I guess you didn’t know that?
It’s not that Luther actually didn’t believe in burning or executing heretics. He just didn’t want to be one of them.
“Funny, the RCC defended the practice against Luther.”
Funny, it was the STATE LAW and Luther supported it and condemned it. He was all over the place. If you had ever read Dave Armstrong’s Martin Luther: Catholic Critical Analysis and Praise you would know this.
“There are even Catholics today that approve of the practice and wish Luther would have burned.”
I seriously doubt that anyone really wants to burn heretics. I think, instead, they spout off like Luther did. Mind you someone can easily make a case that if Luther had been executed Europe never would have suffered a whole series of massive wars as it did.
Luther saved thousands from the grasp of an apostate system. He is a hero of the true Church composed of all true believers even if your sect doesnt think much of him.
Luther’s problem was that he only attempted to roll church history back to the 11th century (the time of introduction of mandatory clerical celibacy) rather than just another century or two to before the Great Schism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.