Martin Luther: Defender of Erroneous Conscience

Crisis Magazine ^ | March 13, 2017 | R. Jared Staudt

[ealgeone]

What is the context of the usage in Matthew?

1Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples,

2saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.

4“They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger.

5“But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments.

6“They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues,

7and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men.

8“But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers.

9“Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.

10“Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ.

11“But the greatest among you shall be your servant.

12“Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted. Matthew 23:1-12 NASB

[boatbums]

Yeppers...that does about cover it pretty well!

It amuses me that the Luther card gets dragged out frequently and, depending on the subject, he is either the trump card or the joker.

[metmom]

And yet Luther altered scripture to his own liking. His erroneous conscience did take take precedence over all.

But when the Catholic church does it, it's OK.

Right?

[Elsie]

Are we to conclude that the other half are violations of Scripture?

Conclude whatever you want; the Scripture is plain: Call no man father.

[metmom]

For one thing, he tossed seven books out “his” bible.

Canon of Trent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_of_Trent

The list confirmed that the deuterocanonical books were on a par with the other books of the canon (while Luther placed these books in the Apocrypha of his canon) and ended debate on the Antilegomena and coordinated church tradition with the Scriptures as a rule of faith.

Please provide a link to prove your claim and show us the copy of the Bible where those books were removed.

[HereInTheHeartland]

These threads are always such fun and solve so much.

How about one debating the merits of Apple versus Windows systems?
More good information would come out of that.

[metmom]

I had no intention of diverting the article. I simply had some questions because I see great inconsistencies in your criticism of Martin Luther for going against the Pope and the church hierarchy. You appear to believe Luther should have been blindly obedient and unquestioning of their moral authority. It seems to me that to be consistent you would have to support everything this current Pope says and does. Maybe you do. I don’t know. It just appears to me that most faithful Roman Catholics on FR are having doubts about the moral authority of the current pope and his hierarchy in Rome.

The irony has not been lost on others either.

many of us have asked the same question and gotten the same answer you're going to get.

None.

[metmom]

That’s really more myth than anything else. http://the-orb.arlima.net/non_spec/missteps/ch11.html If your claim was true, then someone would have to ask, “If the Protestant Revolution (and revolution it was rather than reformation) happened because of “Rome’s corruption” then why were the new sects that sprang up in its wake so corrupt?”

The corruption of Catholicism goes WAY back into it's almost 2,000 year old history.

there's this.

Top 10 Most Wicked Popes

http://listverse.com/2007/08/17/top-10-most-wicked-popes/

1. Liberius, reigned 352-66 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
2. Honorius I, reigned 625-638 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
3. Stephen VI, reigned 896-89 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
4. John XII, reigned 955-964 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
5. Benedict IX, reigned 1032-1048 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
6. Boniface VIII, reigned 1294-1303 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
7. Urban VI, reigned 1378-1389 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
8. Alexander VI, reigned 1492-1503 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
9. Leo X, reigned 1513-1521 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
10. Clement VII, reigned 1523-1524 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]

Top 10 Worst Popes in History

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-worst-popes-in-history.php

1. Pope Alexander VI (1431 – 1503)
2. Pope John XII (c. 937 – 964)
3. Pope Benedict IX (c. 1012 – 1065/85)
4. Pope Sergius III (? – 911)
5. Pope Stephen VI (? – 897)
6. Pope Julius III (1487 – 1555)
7. Pope Urban II (ca. 1035 – 1099)
8. Pope Clement VI (1291 – 1352)
9. Pope Leo X (1475 – 1521)
10. Pope Boniface VIII (c. 1235 – 1303)

And then this, from a Catholic.

St. Peter Damian's Book of Gomorrah: Homosexual Situation Graver than Damian's Time

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/929551/posts

[metmom]

That’s really more myth than anything else. http://the-orb.arlima.net/non_spec/missteps/ch11.html If your claim was true, then someone would have to ask, “If the Protestant Revolution (and revolution it was rather than reformation) happened because of “Rome’s corruption” then why were the new sects that sprang up in its wake so corrupt?”

So care to post examples of corruption in non-Catholic churches that is worse than that?

[metmom]

And yet we have the Catholic church, in their attempt to bolster their worship of Mary, change Scripture in Genesis to say of Mary that SHE would bruise the serpents head.

It doesn't seem like the Catholic church has much basis for complaining about others doing the same thing they do themselves.

http://biblehub.com/genesis/3-15.htm

Douay Rheims Bible

I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

[vladimir998]

“Dude...it’s a question.”

It was a question about something no one ever said. Why would you ask a question about something no one said? See, that’s a question. And it makes sense. And it’s actually about something you did. See how that works? Try that from now on.

[vladimir998]

“The corruption of Catholicism goes WAY back into it’s almost 2,000 year old history.”

Adam and Eve became corrupt even though they talked with God and lived in Eden. Why would you expect all men in the Church to be different even though Christ founded it?

[metmom]

The works are to walk in for sure, but the salvation is by grace through faith and God gives the reason.

So that no one would boast.

Salvation by faith alone precludes ANY boasting on the part of any man.

Claiming works are needed opens that door for man to take credit, boast, and then hold God in debt to the man for what the man has done.

It also takes the gift aspect out of salvation and makes it wages due for work performed, thus completely negating the grace and mercy part.

[vladimir998]

“So care to post examples of corruption in non-Catholic churches that is worse than that?”

Show me where I said “worse”. Also, does it have to be “worse” to be corruption at all? And isn’t heresy (like Protestantism) a corruption in itself, a corruption of truth?

[metmom]

No, I just generally get things correct.

You typed *incorrect* wrong.

[ebb tide]

These threads are always such fun and solve so much.

There's nothing to solve. Luther became a heretic and he died as a heretic.

[ealgeone]

As I said and will continue to say. This is another example of why I say you're the last one on these threads to play by any set of normal or fair debate rules.

I see I will have to amend that to include any normal conversation.

[metmom]

In all honestly, I wasn't raised around an understanding of Mother Mary, so I tend to have the same almost built-in Prostestant beliefs about Her, too, but not the hostility.

What hostility?

Could you show us posts that express hostility towards Mary?

[metmom]

Ymmv, but definitely be careful with what you say and think about Jesus' Mom.

Why her more than anyone else?

[metmom]

That’s pretty lame!

Christ also made the same admonition regarding the term rabbi, which translates “teacher”.

Is the NEA aware of your objection?

But nobody uses the term *teacher* as an address by saying *Teacher Smith* but we do see Catholics calling their priests something like *Father Smith*.

There's a world of different between the word being a common noun and a title of address.

Jesus was talking about addressing others with the title of *Father* and Catholics go into Olympic grade verbal and semantic contortions to justify disobeying the clear concise command of Jesus to not call religious leaders by the title of *Father*.