Luther's 95 Theses
Posted on 06/08/2014 1:59:17 PM PDT by matthewrobertolson
In 2017, we will witness the 500th anniversary of one of the most important, influential and regrettable events in Church history: the Protestant Reformation, or the Protestant Rebellion, as some prefer to call it. Indeed, the latter term would suit me better, too. But, being German, I am used to the former expression and should I ever refer to said event as die protestantische Rebellion, people would think me some sort of radical. On that thought, perhaps it is worth noting that rebels are often quite radical themselves, which is one thing we can definitely say of the so-called "Reformers". To mark this anniversary, the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) has planned a number of events, beginning with a "Lutheran Decade" from 2008 to 2017. Each year has it’s own theme in the form of "The Reformation and…", i.e. Education, Freedom, Music, Tolerance, Politics and others.
The decade will culminate in the celebratory year of 2017, to which the President of the Evangelical "Church" in Germany (EKD), Nikolaus Schneider, has even invited Pope Francis. But, really, how likely is it His Holiness will hop on a plane and join in the celebration of someone his predecessor excommunicated? One might ask, is there any room for Catholics to take part in some sort of event? This is the question that is circulating in the mother country of the Reformation: Germany. The Most Reverend Gerhard Feige, Bishop of Magdeburg, is the Bishops' Conference's representative for ecumenical affairs. He has dedicated a lot of thought and time to the question how Catholics should view this event.
It begins with the name: Do we call it an anniversary, something that could imply happiness, or a commemoration of an event that has wrought such great damage upon the Body of Christ, His holy Bride, the Catholic Church? The German bishops have chosen the latter term. There is still confusion on the whole thing, though: The EKD is not being very clear on what exactly they want to celebrate. One hears catchy words such as "diversity", "conscience", and the like stuck onto the Reformation in their talk, but never do we hear of heresy, schism or even the antisemitism of Luther and his ilk. Indeed, who in his right mind would celebrate the chaos and harm inflicted on the Church by the so-called "Reformers"? Not even the Protestants organizing the event dare to say thus. Yet, one gets the impression that the whole event is not actually interested in critically evaluating the past, or their theology for that matter, but rather praising it as the dawn of an era of "tolerance" and "liberty".
Could this be any further from the truth? Professor Heinz Schilling of Berlin, a member of the advisory board for the anniversary, stated in an interview that Luther was "everything but tolerant" and criticized the EKD as "quite understandably not interested in any of the research’s findings". He went even further and said that the organizers made themselves appear "laughable among scholars" by claiming what they do. Margot Käßmann, who is the anniversary’s ambassador and a former Lutheran "bishop", once claimed that it was thanks to Luther that her sect had female "bishops". The professor criticizes this as yet another inaccuracy and something that Luther certainly did not envision. Is it any wonder, then, that the EKD has not come out clearly and said what the entire occasion is about for them, as the bishops have repeatedly bewailed, if even their own board members see through their catchy slogans?
What about us Catholics? Is there any way in which we can join our separated brethren in their commemoration? I argue: no. Some will disagree, but to me, the Reformation is intrinsically connected to fracture in the Body of Christ, heresy and the resulting total chaos. I could never join any such "commemoration", even if one doesn't call it an "anniversary" for the sake of appeasing Catholics. When have we ever "commemorated" the schism of 1054, or any heresy, for that matter? I believe we would do great harm to the effort of achieving Christian unity by taking part in any way. It obscures the borders between Catholicism and Protestantism, confuses people, and may even cause scandal.
The aforementioned Margot Käßmann suggested the following kind of participation of Catholics and Protestants: Each group could begin a pilgrimage on their own route, and reach one common destination. She would also like the program to achieve that all people learn "that 31 October is Reformation Day and not Halloween", to which Bishop Feige of Magdeburg replied "and the eve of All Saints". But the problem I see with Käßmann’s proposal is this: Although the idea might seem nice, it suggests that Protestantism and Catholicism are somehow equals. They most definitely are not. And certainly not according to Luther himself! Catholics know that their Church is the Church Christ the Lord founded on St. Peter, and Protestantism's very name already suggests otherwise. The Reformers made that point very clear. From a Catholic point of view, a heretical movement that splits the Church cannot be of equal worth as the One True Faith. Just think how we would have fought Arianism if such had been our position! This is not to say that Protestants aren't Christians, of course, but we must realize that Protestantism is not what our Lord willed us to have or believe: Catholicism is. Thus, two equal pilgrimages reaching one destination à la Käßmann would cause scandal and confusion. I assume she does not want it to symbolize the way we might some day find unity, but rather the common destination means Christ. But that is precisely the point: The Catholic Church is the ark of salvation, the Body and Bride of Christ, and She alone has "the words of eternal life" (John 6:68). She is Christ in this world apart from Whom "no one comes to the Father" (John 14:6). Protestantism has distorted those words of eternal life fundamentally, and thus cannot be on equal footing with Holy Mother Church. If Christ is "the Way, the Truth and the Life" apart from Whom there is no salvation, then so is the Catholic Church, for She is His Body (Ephesians 1:22-23, Colossians 1:24).
Thus, let me emphasize again: Celebrating the Reformation, or even commemorating it with Protestants, will blur the sharp line between the One True Church and those communities that came from the Protestant Reformation. It will scandalize and, actually, almost certainly make Christian unity harder to achieve. For in pretending Protestantism is somehow equally valid or of the same dignity as Catholicism, we take away the very reason for Christian unity: to be united in the one Church that our Lord left us, founded on Peter in the person of the Roman Pontiff.
Therefore, I hope the German bishops decide not to participate – however unlikely that is. It remains to be seen whether the ecumenical progress in achieving unity hoped for will come about. Let us pray, that 2017 will bring to many people's attention the Truth of Catholicism and the scandal that the separation of Christians is, fostering in them the desire for unity with Christ in His Bride, which is Holy Church.
Luther's 95 Theses
—
Follow Phillip on Twitter, Like Catholic Analysis and Answering Protestants on Facebook, Add Catholic Analysis and Answering Protestants to your Circles on Google+, and Subscribe to Matthew Olson's YouTube videos.
Mary is referred to as the mother of Jesus in the New Testament. She is called blessed among women and will always be called that. Nothing more...nothing less beyond that.
If one understands the Biblical aspect of Jesus and both His human and Divine nature this really isn't a problem.
Again, it is an attempt by the RCC to accord Mary a higher honor than what is accorded in the Bible. See, in your post you capitalize Mother....as if it's a formal title when it's not. In the words, mother of Jesus, mother is never capitalized as it's not a title.
With all of the energy the RCC has invested in promoting Mary it would be very hard to back off their claims without losing face....and probably a lot of members. It would also seriously undermine the claims of inerrancy of the pope as well especially with the non-biblical 1950 ruling of Mary's assumption. Again...their focus is on the wrong person. It should be about Christ.
If the RCC spent as much time elevating Christ as Mary they would be better off. The focus of the New Testament is about Christ...not Mary. Mary appears in a handful of verses whereas Christ is the focal point of the whole NT. But, if you were a casual observer, you'd think some in the RCC believe it is Mary who saves you.....not Christ.
This is what happens when you read something into the text that isn't there. It is what happens when you start accepting "tradition" as being equal to, or in some cases, superior, to that of the written Word as given to us through the Holy Spirit.
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
And Jesus is God. Ergo Mary is the mother of God.
If one understands the Biblical aspect of Jesus and both His human and Divine nature this really isn't a problem -- the human and divine nature are intertwined in the one person that is Jesus Christ who was 100% God and 100% man -- and who was borne and birthed from Mary, the mother of God.
if you state that Mary bore Jesus but not God in her womb and that she gave birth to just his physical nature, that implies that the divine nature came forth later — a form of adoptionism.
btw, I’m Catholic and I can tell you for a fact that what we believe in is that Jesus Christ, God saves us.
Are you aware there is a movement in the RCC to have the pope declare Mary as a co-redemtrix? Right now the votes aren't there.
Give it a little more time though and it will happen. And it will be non-Biblical as well.
It only took until 1950 to declare the assumption of Mary as dogma....another un-Biblical teaching as well.
Well, it looks like we're at an impasse on this. Been good talking with you.
I suggest that you not do that. What would Jesus say to you about how you treated his mother at the moment of your death?
And where in Scripture are we ever told to obey Mary?
Or even pay any attention to her otherwise?
Well, then, the Catholic mass must also be Bible idolatry, since we are told so often by Catholics that every word of it is from Scripture.
It's ironic and hypocritical that when non-Catholics read the Bible, it's labeled by RC's as *Bible idolatry* and when Catholics read it, it's bragging rights time about how spiritual they are and how much of the Bible THEY read.
Mary, the mother of Jesus. You're getting it.
Changing Mary's name from the one given by the HOLY SPIRIT of *mother of Jesus* to the one created by man to *mother of God*, does NOTHING to correct or instill correct teaching about the nature of Jesus.
All it does is lead to incorrect teaching about who Mary was.
If the Catholic church wanted to correct any error on the nature of Jesus, they would have been better suited going back to Scripture than to change Mary's name and provide the opportunity for even greater error to creep in to the church.
Scripture is of no use to Catholics until they want to bludgeon a non-Catholic into submission to their teaching.
What a fail.........
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm
969 “This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation .... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”510
Names of God from the Bible. Compare them to the names given to Mary in the above prayer.
Jesus
Hope (our) - 1 Timothy 1:1
Counselor - Isaiah 9:6
Advocate - 1 John 2:1
Mediator - 1 Timothy 2:5, Hebrews 9:15, Hebrews 12:24
Holy Spirit
Comforter - John 14:26
Helper – John 14:16
This is worship of Mary if ever there was.....Attributing to her the attributes of God is idolatry.
Mary created the physical nature...Mary did not create the divine nature...
I've not seen the 'every'; but I have seen many catholics bragging about how MUCH 'scripture' is in it...
It implies no such thing. It's only an excuse to justify rewriting what the Holy Spirit stated in Scripture, that is that Mary is *mother of Jesus*.
What does that do with Luke 1:43?
Have you ever read Luke 1 from about 34 on?
Bludgeon ? No use ?
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
I assume you object to certain Scriptures and make up your own traditions to compensate. Rebellions breeds ... well, rebels.
Yes and it clearly states that Jesus Christ born was 100% man and 100% God. Mary bore this 100% man and 100% GOD
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.