What Caused the Reformation?

The Cripplegate, New Generation of Non-Conformists ^ | Oct 28,2014 | Nathan Busenitz, professor of theology at Cripplegate's The Master’s Seminary

[RnMomof7]

What caused the Reformation?

Many people might answer that question by pointing to Martin Luther and his 95 Theses.

But if you were to ask Luther himself, he would not point to himself or his own writings. Instead, he would give all the credit to God and His Word.

Near the end of his life, Luther declared: “All I have done is put forth, preach and write the Word of God, and apart from this I have done nothing. . . . It is the Word that has done great things. . . . I have done nothing; the Word has done and achieved everything.”

Elsewhere, he exclaimed: “By the Word the earth has been subdued; by the Word the Church has been saved; and by the Word also it shall be reestablished.”

Noting Scripture’s foundational place in his own heart, Luther wrote: “No matter what happens, you should say: There is God’s Word. This is my rock and anchor. On it I rely, and it remains. Where it remains, I, too, remain; where it goes, I, too, go.”

Luther understood what caused the Reformation. He recognized that it was the Word of God empowered by the Spirit of God preached by men of God in a language that the common people of Europe could understand and when their ears were exposed to the truth of God’s Word it pierced their hearts and they were radically changed.

It was that very power that had transformed Luther’s own heart, a power that is summarized in the familiar words of Hebrews 4:12: “The Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword.”

During the late middle ages, the Roman Catholic Church had imprisoned God’s Word in the Latin language, a language the common people of Europe did not speak. The Reformers unlocked the Scriptures by translating them. And once the people had the Word of God, the Reformation became inevitable.

We see this commitment to the Scriptures even in the centuries prior to Martin Luther, beginning with the Forerunners to the Reformation:

In the 12th century, the Waldensians translated the New Testament from the Latin Vulgate into their regional French dialects. According to tradition, they were so committed to the Scriptures that different Waldensian families would memorize large sections of the Bible. That way, if Roman Catholic authorities found them and confiscated their printed copies of Scripture, they would later be able to reproduce the entire Bible from memory.

In the 14th century, John Wycliffe and his associates at Oxford translated the Bible from Latin into English. Wycliffe’s followers, known as the Lollards, went throughout the countryside preaching and singing passages of Scripture in English.

In the 15th century, Jan Huss preached in the language of the people, and not in Latin, making him the most popular preacher in Prague at the time. Yet, because Huss insisted that Christ alone was the head of the church, not the pope, the Catholic Council of Constance condemned him for heresy and burned him at the stake (in 1415).

In the 16th century, as the study of Greek and Hebrew were recovered, Martin Luther translated the Bible into German, with the New Testament being completed in 1522.

In 1526, William Tyndale completed a translation of the Greek New Testament into English. A few years later he also translated the Pentateuch from Hebrew. Shortly thereafter he was arrested and executed as a heretic—being strangled and then burned at the stake. According to Fox’s Book of Martyrs, Tyndale’s last words were “Lord, Open the King of England’s Eyes.” And it was just a couple years after his death that King Henry VIII authorized the Great Bible in England—a Bible that was largely based on Tyndale’s translation work. The Great Bible laid the foundation for the later King James version (which was completed in 1611).

The common thread, from Reformer to Reformer, was an undying commitment to the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, such that they were willing to sacrifice everything, including their own lives, to get the Word of God into the hands of the people.

They did this because they understood that the power for spiritual reformation and revival was not in them, but in the gospel (cf. Rom. 1:16–17). And they used the Latin phrase Sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”) to emphasize the truth that God’s Word was the true power and ultimate authority behind all they said and did.

It was ignorance of Scripture that made the Reformation necessary. It was the recovery of the Scripture that made the Reformation possible. And it was the power of the Scripture that gave the Reformation its enduring impact, as the Holy Spirit brought the truth of His Word to bear on the hearts and minds of individual sinners, transforming them, regenerating them, and giving them eternal life.

[BlueDragon]

"...those quotes came straight from Luther."

Perhaps.

Could you provide source for them?

If you could go beyond some web page or another, and find a more precise place where the quotes were derived as you say, "straight from Luther" (as translated from German, of course) that could be helpful.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Here’s one in the same vein you will have no trouble finding; Luther’s dealings with the Christians of Antwerp.

“The devil seeing that this sort of disturbance could not last, has devised a new one; and begins to rage in his members, I mean in the ungodly, through whom he makes his way in all sorts of chimerical follies and extravagant doctrines. This won’t have baptism, that denies the efficacy of the Lord’s supper; a third, puts a world between this and the last judgment ; others teach that Jesus Christ is not God ; some say this, others that ; and there are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads.”

I don’t know why he was so upset, folks were just doing what Luther said they could do; interpret Scripture as they saw fit. People are still doing it today. It’s the fruit of the protestant revolt.

[af_vet_1981]

Actually hatred of Luther can be found all over the place..not just here Rominists hate him because he confronted roman power to its face.. they put out a kill order on him ...

Here is where the false apostle and saint laid down the foundation for the Holocaust.

Anti-Semitism: Martin Luther - "The Jews & Their Lies" (1543)

What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? Since they live among us, we dare not tolerate their conduct, now that we are aware of their lying and reviling and blaspheming. If we do, we become sharers in their lies, cursing and blasphemy. Thus we cannot extinguish the unquenchable fire of divine wrath, of which the prophets speak, nor can we convert the Jews. With prayer and the fear of God we must practice a sharp mercy to see whether we might save at least a few from the glowing flames. We dare not avenge ourselves. Vengeance a thousand times worse than we could wish them already has them by the throat. I shall give you my sincere advice:

First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly ­ and I myself was unaware of it ­ will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.

Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them. (remainder omitted)

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. For they have justly forfeited the right to such an office by holding the poor Jews captive with the saying of Moses (Deuteronomy 17 [:10 ff.]) in which he commands them to obey their teachers on penalty of death, although Moses clearly adds: "what they teach you in accord with the law of the Lord." Those villains ignore that. They wantonly employ the poor people's obedience contrary to the law of the Lord and infuse them with this poison, cursing, and blasphemy. In the same way the pope also held us captive with the declaration in Matthew 16 {:18], "You are Peter," etc, inducing us to believe all the lies and deceptions that issued from his devilish mind. He did not teach in accord with the word of God, and therefore he forfeited the right to teach.

Fifth, I advise that safe­conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let they stay at home. (...remainder omitted).

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, they have no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they have stolen and robbed from us all they possess. Such money should now be used in no other way than the following: Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest. With this he could set himself up in some occupation for the support of his poor wife and children, and the maintenance of the old or feeble. For such evil gains are cursed if they are not put to use with God's blessing in a good and worthy cause.

Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen 3[:19]}. For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting, and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.

* * *

But what will happen even if we do burn down the Jews' synagogues and forbid them publicly to praise God, to pray, to teach, to utter God's name? They will still keep doing it in secret. If we know that they are doing this in secret, it is the same as if they were doing it publicly. for our knowledge of their secret doings and our toleration of them implies that they are not secret after all and thus our conscience is encumbered with it before God.

* * *

Accordingly, it must and dare not be considered a trifling matter but a most serious one to seek counsel against this and to save our souls from the Jews, that is, from the devil and from eternal death. My advice, as I said earlier, is:

First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss in sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire. That would demonstrate to God our serious resolve and be evidence to all the world that it was in ignorance that we tolerated such houses, in which the Jews have reviled God, our dear Creator and Father, and his Son most shamefully up till now but that we have now given them their due reward.

* * *

I wish and I ask that our rulers who have Jewish subjects exercise a sharp mercy toward these wretched people, as suggested above, to see whether this might not help (though it is doubtful). They must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in, proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did in the wilderness, slaying three thousand lest the whole people perish. They surely do not know what they are doing; moreover, as people possessed, they do not wish to know it, hear it, or learn it. There it would be wrong to be merciful and confirm them in their conduct. If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs, so that we do not become partakers of their abominable blasphemy and all their other vices and thus merit God's wrath and be damned with them. I have done my duty. Now let everyone see to his. I am exonerated. "

[Cap'n Crunch]

It wasn’t the reading of Scripture by one’s self that was the problem, it was the interpretation of Scripture to one’s own ends that is the problem. And the same problem has persisted since the ‘reformers’ opened Pandora’s Box.

You’re pointing out all these translation problems. How then was it OK for Luther and the boys to ‘jack it up’ further with their interpretations and additions?

[daniel1212]

t appears to me that Luther was a great man, regardless of what some may say

He was one of others who dissented from Rome in critical areas out of conscious toward God, and continued to proactively oppose Rome out of doctrinal convictions, but did so at a time of God's design which had profound effects, which Luther had not himself planned.

However, his role in the Peasants War , and esp. his latter exasperation and vindictive invectives against the Jews (but see also popes against the Jews ), in addition to his retaining some errors of Cath. tradition, impugn his status.

But as a result of the primary Reformation distinctive, that of Scripture being the supreme authority as the wholly inspired and accurate word of God (which liberal Prots effectively deny), few Prots know much about him or care. If fact, not thinking of men above that which is written, (1Co. 4:6) while violated by some, has gone to the other extreme in which few Prots know much about such notable evangelicals.

Maybe a series on such would be fitting someday.

[Cap'n Crunch]

I have a question about Tyndale. Was he praying that Henry VIII’s eyes would be opened to Tyndale’s translations of the Bible into English or opened to his, according to Tyndale, divorce of Catherine of Aragon which Tyndale evidently opposed?

From what I’ve read Tyndale believed that Kings should be the Head of the Church in their own countries. Henry VIII used Tyndale’s writings to, in part, justify his split with Rome. He then proceeded to put to death everybody that did not agree with him and also accused Tyndale of treason, causing Tyndale to flee England.

Had Tyndale remained in England under Henry, I wonder if he would have been willing to be executed by Henry for his ‘treason’ like many others were.

[Springfield Reformer]

From Luther's letter to the Christians at Antwerp:

We believed, during the reign of the pope, that the spirits which make a noise and disturbance in the night, were those of the souls of men, who after death, return and wander about in expiation of their sins. This error, thank God, has been discovered by the Gospel, and it is known at present, that they are not the souls of men, but nothing else than those malicious devils who used to deceive men by false answers. It is they that have brought so much idolatry into the world.

The devil seeing that this sort of disturbance could not last, has devised a new one; and begins to rage in his members, I mean in the ungodly, through whom he makes his way in all sorts of chimerical follies and extravagant doctrines. This won't have baptism, that denies the efficacy of the Lord's supper; a third, puts a world between this and the last judgment ; others teach that Jesus Christ is not God ; some say this, others that ; and there are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads.

Available here:  http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2007/07/luther-there-are-almost-as-many-sects.html

So in context we see that Luther is not responding to Sola Scriptura at all.  His analysis of the diversity of belief is a change of tactics by Satan.  From the same letter:

When the pope reigned we heard nothing of these troubles. The strong one (the devil) was in peace in his fortress; but now that a stronger one than he is come, and prevails against him and drives him out, as the Gospel says, he storms and comes forth with noise and fury.
 Dear friends, one of these spirits of disorder has come amongst you in flesh and blood; he would lead you astray with the inventions of his pride: beware of him.

First, he tells you that all men have the Holy Ghost. Secondly, that the Holy Ghost is nothing more than our reason and our understanding. Thirdly, that all men have faith. Fourthly, that there is no hell, that at least the flesh only will be damned. Fifthly, that all souls will enjoy eternal life. Sixthly, that nature itself teaches us to do to our neighbour what we would he should do to us ; this he calls faith. Seventhly, that the law is not violated by concupiscence, so long as we are not consenting to the pleasure. Eighthly, that he that has not the Holy Ghost, is also without sin, for he is destitute of reason.

The disorderly individual he was referring to here was apparently an Anabaptist who was claiming special revelation, direct divine authority equal to Scripture, and contradictory to Scripture, which is alien to both the spirit and practice of Sola Scriptura, and has greater analogy to how Rome regards its own Delphic oracle. Luther was persuaded by neither.

You might think it is hardly fair to assault the "unity" of Rome as the work of Satan, but you must admit in principle some forms of unity are positively satanic.  In one word. Islam. Which we know is also somewhat subject to division (Sunni versus Shiite, and others perhaps less well known).  Yet what uniformity of darkness they have in regard to the person of Jesus Christ.  And as long as unity is working for the Devil, it remains an effective strategy to deceive sinful men and women en masse.

But the good news is that Rome was not even that unified in Luther's day!  As Luther points out:

“…there is no other place in the world where there are so many sects, schisms, and errors as in the papal church. For the papacy, because it builds the church upon a city and person, has become the head and fountain of all sects which have followed it and have characterized Christian life in terms of eating and drinking, clothes and shoes, tonsures and hair, city and place, day and hour. For the spirituality and holiness of the papal church lives by such things, as was said above.  This order fasts at this time, another order fasts at another time; this one does not eat meat, the other one does not eat eggs; this one wears black, the other one white; this one is Carthusian,  the other Benedictine;  and so they continue to create innumerable sects and habits, while faith and true Christian life go to pieces. All this is the result of the blindness which desires to see rather than believe the Christian church and to seek devout Christian life not in faith but in works, of which St. Paul writes so much in Colossians [2]. These things have invaded the church and blindness has confirmed the government of the pope.”

Available at the same link given above

So by an inescapable logic, Luther sees that heresy has it's source in Satan, and that it has never ceased to operate, but that tactics do change with changing circumstances.  And where else can heresy come from but those who once associated with true Christian faith?  So it would be stunning if Satan had stopped taking good churchmen and making them into heretics for hundreds of years while Rome stretched it's power over the kingdoms of the earth.  The false doctrines Luther encountered were not derived from godly men exploring Scripture in their own language, but from false visions of false spirits antithetical to the sound doctrine of the written word of God.  It seems impossible to my tiny mind how feeding, as Jesus said we must, on every word that proceeds from the mouth of God, should be conflated with the work of devils. But I'm sure old Screwtape would approve.  

Peace,

SR

[Springfield Reformer]

I have a question about Tyndale. Was he praying that Henry VIII’s eyes would be opened to Tyndale’s translations of the Bible into English or opened to his, according to Tyndale, divorce of Catherine of Aragon which Tyndale evidently opposed?

Good question. The quote is ambiguous. It is in the form of a general request, with nothing specific. One could think Tyndale was asking for the whole enchilada. Conversion, repentance, openness to the word of God. Hard to say. But we do see that despite Henry's defects, God did use him to make the word of God more widely known, and as this is in keeping with God's own purpose, we see it as the work of the sovereign God overruling the devices of men. All things work together for good to those who love God.

Peace,

SR

[Cap'n Crunch]

‘But we do see that despite Henry’s defects, God did use him to make the word of God more widely known, and as this is in keeping with God’s own purpose, we see it as the work of the sovereign God overruling the devices of men. All things work together for good to those who love God.’

Could we then say the same thing regarding the defects of certain Pope’s and Catholic religious who did not faithfully carry out their entrusted mission? I believe so.

Where we part ways is the reformers breaking away from the Church and starting their own, which has led to every man becoming his own Pope.

[xone]

Even the milkmaids think they can interpret Scripture!” - Martin Luther.

How can this be???? This forum has been told countless times that almost everyone was illiterate. Luther must have had the only milkmaids who could read working for him.

[xone]

Here are some charming Luther quotes:

Here's a list of charming Catholic deeds:

Catholic anti-semitism

I wonder where Luther learned that AS. Note that some of these Catholics were 'Saints'. He was (They were)no Christian.

And how does your day go? Never a harsh word, a passing bit of hate? How would CrimsonTidegirl's life look in the harsh light of reality?

[xone]

See #91. I love to see the posts on Luther’s AS, gives a chance for the whole story.

[Cap'n Crunch]

The quote I posted, which you responded to, was taken from the same website you reference, ‘beggarsall.’

How can one be a disorderly Anabaptist individual by simply doing what Luther said all men should do? Doesn’t this cause a problem to those who elevate the Anabaptists as the forerunners of the Baptist Church?

Also, this article references the Waldensian’s. What did Luther think about their beliefs? If you know.

Pardon my rambling but I would be surprised that this was simply one disorderly Anabaptist as the letter was describing the Christians of Antwerp. Luther says “this one won’t” this and “that one rejects this,” etc.

There seemed to be much infighting even amongst the reformers as to who was a heretic and who was not.

This quote by Luther needs a lot of explaining. He seems to be pointing the finger at different Catholic religious orders. Those orders, while having different rules, were all obedient to the teachings of the Church. (or should have been). And he speaks in vague terms about religious life falling to pieces but there are no examples given.

“…there is no other place in the world where there are so many sects, schisms, and errors as in the papal church. For the papacy, because it builds the church upon a city and person, has become the head and fountain of all sects which have followed it and have characterized Christian life in terms of eating and drinking, clothes and shoes, tonsures and hair, city and place, day and hour.” etc...

I guess it boils down to authority. Bottom line, Luther rejected the authority of the Church and started his own. Then criticized others for doing the same thing that he himself had done.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Many people during that time were illiterate. Whether or not the quote is attributed to him, it certainly is correct. He made similar statements regarding folks in Antwerp, and about other reformers as well.

[Springfield Reformer]

Could we then say the same thing regarding the defects of certain Pope’s and Catholic religious who did not faithfully carry out their entrusted mission? I believe so.

I hold to a higher standard anyone claiming to be the direct agent (vicar) of Christ on earth.  Kings have a lower job.  Practically a janitor by comparison.  If one who claims to be the vicar of Christ seems more to represent the other side of the table, what am I to make of that?  Yes, God can overrule any evil person for good ends.  But how can He represent Himself in direct agency by evil men?  

Don't misunderstand.  I respect your argument.  It's the only one you've got, in terms of reconciling evil leaders with divine purpose.  And it would work if we were just talking about the civil magistrate.  But the Ecclesia is the handiwork of Jesus Himself, and while we must allow that even Christians will sin and represent Him poorly on occasion, we cannot accept that He would create an office of direct agency and then confuse the faithful by populating it with horrendously evil men.  Such claims cast aspersions on either the goodness or the sovereignty of God. Which is why we hold the true Vicar of Christ on earth to be the Holy Spirit, as Jesus specifically said the Holy Spirit was being sent to stand in Jesus' place while He was gone from earth. That act is the assignment of absolute agency, and it only applies to the Holy Spirit. Every other would-be "vicar of Christ" is a mere pretender to the throne.

Furthermore, we are not obligated to accept such a malignant contrivance as the papacy.  There was no monarchical episcopate in Rome for nearly the first two centuries of Christianity.  And this is not surprising, as the New Testament Scriptures do not require the creation of such an office.  

So from our perspective, the facts of history, including evil popes, and the absence of early popes, are all consistent with the Scriptural account.  We have but one Master.  Why trade down?

Where we part ways is the reformers breaking away from the Church and starting their own, which has led to every man becoming his own Pope.

The Ecclesia is the creation of Jesus Himself. Rome is in no position to define who is in and who is out. The membership lists are not kept on earth, but in the Lamb's Book of Life.  At the end of days, those who have relied on sight rather than faith to find the body of Christ will be gravely disappointed. But His sheep hear His voice, and will not follow another, not for all the enticements in the world, but especially not for the false fear that obeying Christ by feeding on every word of God would somehow turn him into a pope.  An ugly threat that is. I would rather turn into a frog, and probably have more chance of that, than ever seeing myself as a pope, a usurper of the divine throne.  No faithful Christian would ever aspire to that.

Peace,

SR

[af_vet_1981]

Here are some charming Luther quotes: Here's a list of charming Catholic deeds: Catholic anti-semitism I wonder where Luther learned that AS. Note that some of these Catholics were 'Saints'. He was (They were)no Christian. And how does your day go? Never a harsh word, a passing bit of hate? How would CrimsonTidegirl's life look in the harsh light of reality?

He learned it out of the evil treasure of his heart. Catholics do not believe OSAS. You can cast Catholics outside into outer darkness with Luther and it neither changes the faith once delivered to the saints nor undoes the foundation of the one holy catholic apostolic Church. The same is not true with Luther and your faith group.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isaiah, Catholic chapter five, Protestant verse twenty, as authorized by King James

A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.
Luke, Catholic chapter six, Protestant verses forty five, as authorized by King James

Martin Luther is foundational to the Reformation. When, by his own testimony he is shown to be evil and illegitimate, the foundation of that so-called reformation is shown to be illegitimate, for a wicked Gentile had no authority to form or re-form anything opposed to the holy catholic apostolic church founded on the Jewish Apostles and Jewish Prophets, with Messiah as the chief cornerstone of that foundation. No attempt to justify his wickedness or madness can make him a legitimate leader.

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
-Matthew, Catholic chapter twenty five, Protestant verses thirty one to forty six, as authorized by King James

[af_vet_1981]

Good question. The quote is ambiguous. It is in the form of a general request, with nothing specific. One could think Tyndale was asking for the whole enchilada. Conversion, repentance, openness to the word of God. Hard to say. But we do see that despite Henry's defects, God did use him to make the word of God more widely known, and as this is in keeping with God's own purpose, we see it as the work of the sovereign God overruling the devices of men. All things work together for good to those who love God.

No, I do not see that. Henry was wicked monster of a man. Claiming he loved God and thus all things worked together for Henry's good is cognitive dissonance; might as well say the same about Ahab and Jezebel. It seems any leader of the Reformation must be rehabilitated.

[xone]

And Luther's sin is no different than any of his time or any of today. The only recourse is Christ, and that's what Luther taught just like scripture does.

These stupid AS smears posted by Catholics ignore the same or worse behavior by their saints; what can be inferred from this? That AS is terribly grave, unless you are the Pope doing the expulsion or the Catholic tailor making the prescribed badge that all the Jews were required to wear. That is the history, Luther talked as an AS but the Catholic church DID as an AS. None of Luther's AS rants survived as doctrine nor drove a Jew from his home. The Catholic church would have done well to be an AS like Luther. Instead, the Catholic church participated and drove these events until the outbreak of WWII.

Based on the state of Catholicism, he easily could have learned in the pews while growing up. But he admits it came from the fact that the Jews didn't respond to the Gospel.

[xone]

Whether or not the quote is attributed to him, it certainly is correct.

Nice logic where truth is optional.

[af_vet_1981]

Here we read Luther just before his death confiding in his wife of his conspiring and plotting to persecute some fifty Jewish refugees near Eisleben. He wants to remove the protection by a Christian Countess by his preaching as he does for a Count who has already "outlawed" them according to Luther's pre-Holocaust Seven Step Program. Outlaws have no legal recourse. They may be plundered, robbed, raped, and murdered.

Of course neither Luther's words, nor yours in his defense, will stand with Matthew staring at you in the eternal mirror of truth.

I think that hell and the whole world must be empty of all their devils, who perhaps have all met together on my account at Eisleben, so stiff and stubborn is the state of affairs. There are Jews here, near fifty in a house, as I have before written to you. They say that at Rissdorf, near Eisleben, the place where I was ill on my journey hither, nigh four hundred Jews pass in and out. Count Albrecht, to whom all the frontier round Eisleben belongs, has withdrawn his protection from any Jews who may be seized on his property; yet no one will as yet do any thing to them. The Countess of Mansfeld, widow of Solms, is considered the protector of the Jews. I know not whether it is true; but I have made it strongly enough apparent to-day, if one chooses to understand it, what my opinion is, if it is of any use. Pray, pray, pray, and help us, that we may do it well. For to-day I had a mind to give full vent to my wrath, but was restrained when the wretchedness of my fatherland occurred to me.

(eislebbn,) February 1, 1546. I wish you grace and peace in Christ, and send you my poor, old, infirm love. Dear Katie, I was weak on the road to Eisleben, but that was my own fault. Had you been with me you would have said it was the fault of the Jews or of their God. For we had to pass through a village hard by Eisleben where many Jews live; perhaps they blew on me too hard. (In the city of Eisleben there are at this hour fifty Jewish residents.) As I drove through the village such a cold wind blew from behind through my cap on my head that it was like to turn my brain to ice. This may have helped my vertigo, but now, thank God, I am so well that I am sore tempted by fair women and care not how gallant I am. When the chief matters are settled, I must devote myself to driving out the Jews. Count Albert is hostile to them, and has given them their deserts, but no one else has. God willing, I will help Count Albert from the pulpit. I drink Neunburger beer of just that flavor which you praised so much at Mansf eld. It pleases me well and acts as a laxative. Your little sons went to Mansfeld day before yesterday, after they had humbly begged Jack-an-apes1 to take them. I don't know what they are doing; if it were cold they might freeze, but as it is warm they may do or suffer what they like. God bless you with all my household and remember me to my table companions. Your old lover, M. L.