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 ...
“Luthiers main opposition was the thought that one could pay enough to get to heaven and that someone could intercede on their behalf.”
I’m not sure what you’re saying. I think you’re largely presenting the one dimensional myth about Luther. Luther’s issues extended way beyond any possible abuse of doctrine by Johann Tetzel. If Tetzel was misreprenting established doctrine on indulgences or creating new doctrine on indulgences, none of that explains why Luther was creating his own novel theology like sola fide or sola scriptura.
By the way, Luther wrote this in the Ninety-Five Theses:
73. Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.
There are quite a few myths surrounding Luther, indulgences, the Ninety-Five Theses, etc. Here’s just one example: http://www.luther.de/en/legenden/tanschl.html
“Luther saved thousands from the grasp of an apostate system.”
No, Luther created 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.”
I’m not in a sect. Protestants have sects. Protestantism is a Lutheran invention from the 16th century. It has no connection to historic Christianity.
“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.”
If you said that to Luther he would have no idea where you were getting that from. Luther wasn’t “rolling back” anything. He was inventing anew - even if he denied it at the times. A new liturgy, a new priestless ministry, dropping most sacraments, warping those he kept, dropping books from the canon of the Bible (and not just the Old Testament either), etc. This was a new faith and it would be rejected by the Eastern Orthodox as much as by orthodox Catholics.
To borrow from your tag line, I’d say Luther appears to be living rent free in YOUR head.
No kidding. I only think about Luther because of these Catholic threads. This guy is tilting at windmills. God ripped the reigns from the unworthy servants of Rome, plain and simple. He left them with an ersatz (made up) system that feeds off its own arrogance/fasle humility (they're one).
“false”
If his writings convince,people he was anti jew, then his other writings should equally convince people he was equally anti german, his own people. He didnt spare his angst on them either.
I knew there was a reason I despise that man more than pickled anchovies.
“To borrow from your tag line, I’d say Luther appears to be living rent free in YOUR head.”
No, actually if you look around here Martin Luther is clearly living rent free in the minds of those who believe in the myths about him.
“God ripped the reigns from the unworthy servants of Rome, plain and simple. He left them with an ersatz (made up) system that feeds off its own arrogance/fasle humility (they’re one).”
That’s all a delusional fantasy of your own making.
I am a Lutheran.
Why would the SDA’s want a Luther Square? Thew view him as just another “papist” (or at least the local ones do).
Is it by an Augustinian church?
All he had to do was purchase an indulgence.
“I am a Lutheran.”
Read Ellen Gould White and you’ll see she thought of Luther as a hero. She didn’t agree with all of his teachings, however. White helped popularize the myths about Luther for an American audience: http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc7.html
“All he had to do was purchase an indulgence.”
Except that it didn’t work that way. I guess there are morons who still believe it did.
Too bad Archbishop Albrecht didn't post a message to Fr. Tetzel instructing him to return the money.
Ok, if you really want to play.
Why is Usury no longer a mortal sin?
An objective analysis no doubt, though many RC scholars see otherwise.
...Luther is an intellectual giant, or, to use a word from Paul Althaus, an "ocean. " The danger of drowning in him, of not being able to come to grips with him satisfactorily, arises from his tremendous output, but no less from his own original style, which we are going to take up. It sounds banal, but cannot be left unsaid: Luther belongs in the first rank of men with extraordinary intellectual creativity. He is in the full sense a genius, a man of massive power in things religious and a giant as well in theological interpretation. Because of this, he has in many respects shaped the history of the world--even of our world today.”- Catholic Scholars Dialogue with Luther(Jared Wicks, S.J, Editor. 1970, Loyola University Press) p. 4.
Technically this worthy examination argues that Luther was not against being Jewish, as if the race was inferior (nor are blacks inferior to whites, but there are cultural generalities) but he was actually anti-Judaic.
Nor was Luther contrary to many Catholics in his attitude toward the Jews, for while there are some unbalanced RCs who have the strange idea that if they can discredit the character of Luther (whom evangelicals disagree with on many things) than they can somehow seriously impugn what we believe, yet real popes and his prelates are also indicted for harshness toward Jews, and providing fodder for the Holocaust.
In The Popes Against the Jews : The Vatican's Role in the Rise of Modern Anti-Semitism, historian David Kertzer notes,
“the legislation enacted in the 1930s by the Nazis in their Nuremberg Laws and by the Italian Fascists with their racial laws—which stripped the Jews of their rights as citizens—was modeled on measures that the [Roman Catholic] Church itself had enforced for as long as it was in a position to do so” (9).
In 1466,
in festivities sponsored by Pope Paul II, Jews were made to race naked through the streets of the city. A particularly evocative later account describes them: “Races were run on each of the eight days of the Carnival by horses, asses and buffaloes, old men, lads, children, and Jews. Before they were to run, the Jews were richly fed, so as to make the race more difficult for them, and at the same time, more amusing for the spectators. They ran from the Arch of Domitian to the Church of St. Mark at the end of the Corso at full tilt, amid Rome’s taunting shrieks of encouragement and peals of laughter, while the Holy Father stood upon a richly ornamented balcony and laughed heartily. Two centuries later, these practices, now deemed indecorous and unbefitting the dignity of the Holy City, were stopped by Clement IX. In their place the Pope assessed a heavy tax on the Jews to help pay the costs of the city’s Carnival celebrations.
But various other Carnival rites continued. For many years the rabbis of the ghetto were forced to wear clownish outfits and march through the streets to the jeers of the crow, pelted by a variety of missiles. Such rites were not peculiar to Rome. In Pisa in the eighteenth century, for example, it was customary each year, as part of Carnival, for students to chase after the fattest Jew in the city, capture him, weigh him, and then make him give them his weight in sugar-coated almonds.
In 1779, Pius VI resurrected some of the Carnival rites that had been neglected in recent years. Most prominent among them was the feudal rite of homage, in which ghetto officials, made to wear special clothes, stood before an unruly mob in a crowded piazza, making an offering to Rome’s governors.
It was this practice that occasioned the formal plea from the ghetto to Pope Gregory XVI in 1836. The Jews argued that such rites should be abandoned, and cited previous popes who had ordered them halted. They asked that, in his mercy, the Pope now do the same. On November 5, the Pope met with his secretary of state to discuss the plea. A note on the secretary of state’s copy of the petition, along with his signature, records the Pope’s decision: “It is not opportune to make any innovation.” The annual rites continued.
“When all is said and done, the [Roman Catholic] Church’s claim of lack of responsibility for the kind of anti-Semitism that made the Holocaust possible comes down to this: The Roman Catholic Church never called for, or sanctioned, the mass murder of the Jews. Yes, the Jews should be stripped of their rights as equal citizens. Yes, they should be kept from contact with the rest of society. But Christian Charity and Christian theology forbade good Christians to round them up and murder them.”
See more in part 5 of a series (1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5, 6 .
Also see second half of this post . Thank God for His light.
Right, the Vatican would never sponsor or endorse Jewish persecution.
Then there RCs here who reject modern popes as being so, and relegate others to Hell whom Rome, via treating them as funerals lauding them, basically infers will be in glory. And then there is a
Cardinal Dulles who even states that, “According to Vatican II, the communion of the church of Christ extends far beyond the visible borders of the Roman Catholic Church. The Council’s teaching on this point was not a new departure, but an assertion of a very traditional position, held by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. All who have the gifts of faith, hope, and charity, even though they be not Catholics or even Christians, are in some sense members of Christ’s body, and therefore of the church.” (p. 59) — Cardinal Avery Dulles, A Church to Believe; In http://www.crowhill.net/journeyman/Vol1No3/dulles.html </font>
Luther is the hero now?
Again?
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.