Posted on 01/23/2011 5:12:54 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
Did Martin Luther Act Infallibly in Defining What Books Belong in the Bible?
If Luther did not act infallibly:
- How can Protestants be certain that they have an infallible collection of Books in Holy Scripture?
- How can the Bible be the sole rule of faith, if no one knows with certainty which books belong in the Bible?
If Luther acted infallibly:
- How do you know?
>> “Though they may be baptized in the Church, though they may attend Mass, when they believe and practice what is not official Church teaching and doctrine, they have separated themselves from it.” <<
.
Then why didn’t the Bishop excommunicate them all, including the Pastors? - That was Paul’s clear instruction.
.
http://www.abibleconcordance.com/c354.htm#c363
A simple search of the word church in the Bible reveals that its usage is not limited to describing only the believers, but rather an institution of beliefs, elders, and such.
That is the Catholic understanding of church, the both/and understanding as in, the church is both the body of believers and the institutional hierarchy.
“That is the Catholic understanding of church,....”
And that is a flawed understanding.
Hoss
‘I don’t see where Luther’s canon differed any from that of the canon of Augustine’s time. What he seemed to be rebelling against was the Council of Trent.’
Since the Theses were published about 50 years prior to the Council of Trent, you may be referring to the Lateran Council.
The Council of Trent . . .between December 13, 1545, and December 4, 1563 in twenty-five sessions for three periods.
On March 16, 1517, the Fifth Council of the Lateran closed its activities with a number of reform proposals (on the selection of bishops, taxation, censorship and preaching) but not on the major problems that confronted the Church in Germany and other parts of Europe. A few months later, October 31, 1517, Martin Luther issued his 95 Theses in Wittenberg.— Wiki
‘I don’t see where Luther’s canon differed any from that of the canon of Augustine’s time. What he seemed to be rebelling against was the Council of Trent.’
Since the Theses were published about 50 years prior to the Council of Trent, you may be referring to the Lateran Council.
The Council of Trent . . .between December 13, 1545, and December 4, 1563 in twenty-five sessions for three periods.
On March 16, 1517, the Fifth Council of the Lateran closed its activities with a number of reform proposals (on the selection of bishops, taxation, censorship and preaching) but not on the major problems that confronted the Church in Germany and other parts of Europe. A few months later, October 31, 1517, Martin Luther issued his 95 Theses in Wittenberg.— Wiki
More circular argument, which is exactly what the original post was about.
Maybe reading it again would be a good idea.
“That’s food for thought, Pope Hoss.”
And thank goodness that’s just ‘ad hominem’ — because if I were Pope, I would dissolve the Roman Catholic Church and excommunicate myself for being Pope.
:D
Hoss
Of course since literacy was limited to a very few, the dissemination of scripture is a moot point and thus protestant conjecture on this allegation is rendered meaningless and irrelevant.
You need to immerse yourself in this medieval history of the monasteries to appreciate the contribution Catholicism made in preserving scripture. Yet I suppose, "Eaten bread is quickly forgotten" thus the protestant gives no thanks where thanks is due.
The Eastern Church united to the Western Church did play a prominent role in scriptural formation. Any comments I have read from adherents of the Eastern Church would not accept revisionist protestant history which seems to be favored by many protestants on this forum.
>> “Please enlighten me as to which have purged themselves and therefore are now made up entirely of non sinners.” <<
.
Your argument is not scriptural.
Nowhere does the bible ascribe to believers the mission of purging sinners. The issue is not sinners, but heretics.
With the lone exception of the “Emerging Church” movement which appears to cross Protestant/Catholic lines, protestant churches are fairly dilligent at putting heretics out of the fold.
The Emerging Church movement is an enigma.
.
. LOL!
.
Diverting the matter from the acceptance of open and notorious sin in the priesthood to the presence of sinners in the Church, sinners that all of us are, is disingenuous of you. There's the matter of repentance to consider, I'm sure you're aware.
Unrepentant sinners in positions of authority within Protestant churches have been promptly removed in every instance that I'm aware. Name one that hasn't been and I'll join you in condemning the sin and calling for the removal of that individual.
Not so with the Roman Catholic Church.
While I would agree that the authors of Scripture must have been able to write infallibly, considering the controversy around its compilation, I seriously doubt they acted infallibly.
Even if they did, and God preserved His Word through them, it doesn't automatically go to follow that anything else they did was infallible, or that if we believe that that one action they took was infallible, that we must take all other actions and statements by them as infallible.
The hierarchy is the leaders. What use is there of a leader, if all is of one accord? What was the practical purpose of those men the Apostles chose as leaders?
This type of thread really has no place on FR. We should be able to block all religion threads. They just devolve into “my religion is better than yours”.
Anyway, one can always buy “The Other Bible” which includes all of the known scripture that was tossed by the Jews, Catholics, etc. over the years. I have read it cover-to-cover and, IMHO, it doesn’t materially change anything.
Let’s just ask Jim to create a filter within our profile to not waste bandwidth on issues we do not care to discuss. It might make FR faster and more reliable.
Yeah I got my dates confused. Even so, Luther used a canon that was similar to the Hebrew bible, the Masoretic text. Similar but not exact, Protestantism today accepts as canon books Luther thought questionable. So to say Protestantism uses a Lutheran canon isn’t even accurate.
>> “The question is, by what authority did Luther determine his canon of Scripture?” <<
.
Where in the scriptures is the authorization to define a cannon of scripture?
.
>> “Did he act infallibly?” <<
.
Where is the scriptures is infallibility ascribed to any man but Christ?
Nowhere! The scriptures go out of the way to show the total fallibility of men, including the disciples, all of which were shown to be immensely fallible.
.
Funny, this was part of our priest’s homily this morning.
The Church has an avenue for those such as these. It’s called reconciliation where those who sin are forgiven when they repent.
The Church may have been lulled by false repentance of some of them.
Anyone who has separated themselves can be in full communion again when they confess their sins and are forgiven.
The problem is that many have no idea they have separated themselves due to those beliefs and therefore do not repent nor seek forgiveness.
The sad scandal that has rocked the Church, just as similar ones have rocked protestant congregations and even education, is not the first. What God does with it will eventually make known its purpose. A stronger church with stronger more faithful priests will be a good thing.
As starters, we have Vickey Jean Robinson the unrepentant protestant homosexual bishop of New Hampshire , Kathy Schori chief priestess of the Episcopal Church being just two examples of current deviancy in protestant leaders. If you wish we could continue.
All you have to do is stay off the religion forum. - Mission acomplished.
.
No. He rejected the Bible that was used by all CATHOLICS in his day.
*Catholic* is not necessarily synonymous with *Christian*.
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.