95 "thesis"

[ironmonk]

luther believed that the Catholic Church was built by Christ, and lost it's way. When luther said that the Church built by Christ lost it's way, luther called Jesus a liar, because Jesus said that His Church would NEVER be overcome by the Netherworld.

"We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we received it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all." ~ Martin Luther

Also, luther believed in poligamy... he married a man that was already married. his reasoning was if the man has two wife's then he would be less prone to adultary.... This is a major distortion of all Christian teaching on the matter.

1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent” Matthew 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

True...through the Catholic Church as the Teacher for those who truly love him

2. This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the church of Rome clergy.

In the Bible we see the sacrament of Penance (or power to give it) in:

God forgives sin Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21

Christ has power to forgive sin Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24; Col 3:13

Confession instituted by Christ Jn 20:22-23

Forgiveness is through Christ 2Cor 2:10

Is for reconciliation with Christ 2Cor 5:18

Reconciliation is from Christ Rom 5:11; Col 1:20; Heb 1:3

Power is delegated by Christ Jn 20:23; 2Cor 5:18

Degrees of sin (mortal or venial?) 1Jn 5:16

Penance reconciles the sinner to the community of believers 2 Cor 2:5-8

"If you forgive sins ... they are forgiven." Jn 20:22-23

Binding on earth and heaven. Mt 18:18

Ministry of reconciliation. 2 Cor 5:18

Forgiveness of sins, anointing of the sick, confession. Jas 5:14-16

3. Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

To repent is to change from doing wrong.

4. The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

With this statement luther calls Jesus a liar, I believe what Jesus said in St. Matt 16:19 "I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." and in John 20:23 "Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."

5. The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.

I believe Jesus when He said:

St. Matt 16:18 "And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, 13 and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

St. Matt 28:18

11 Then Jesus approached and said to them, "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

19 Go, therefore, 12 and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,

20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. 13 And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age."

John 20:23 "Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."

If diciples can forgive sins (power given by Jesus) and Jesus told them to "make diciples of nations", then those diciples can forgive sins too. And that chain that was started by Jesus would be with us today.... Hmmm, which church could that be??? OH!! The Catholic Church.... "It isss..., isn't it"

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.

Guilt and Sin are separate things. There are many people who continue to sin without guilt, but the sin is still sin.

7. God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.

Where does this point come from?

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

luther makes a point but yet does not provide references so people who can think for themselves can see if he is correct, wrong, lying or truthful.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

We believe Jesus when He said in St Matt 16:19 " I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

luther distorts the teaching making it sound like the teaching is that the Pope that 'controls' the Holy Spirit, the Pope cannot teach what is not true, since Jesus said that He would be with them until the end of time (St. Matt. 28:20)

10. Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.

This is a lie... the Priest during Confession of the dying will forgive the dying of all his sins. The Priest will not deny forgiveness of someone asking for forgiveness.

11. Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory were evidently sown while the bishops slept. Matthew 13:25

luther is one of these weeds that this section speaks of. You must look at the whole section, not just one line. 24-30

12. In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

I do not know the truth of this statement, but the Church has the authority to change something such as this. The actual acts of Penance are between the sinner and God...

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.

Again, no refs to what luther is talking about.

14. Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.

This point has nothing to do with the Church or Priests... This is one of the many staws luther pulls for to attack the Church.

15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

No refs and pointless.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and assurance of salvation.

No refs and pointless.

17. It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily decrease and love increase.

No refs and pointless. What does this have to do with the Church?

18. Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture, that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to grow in love.

No refs and pointless. Purgatory is a cleansing before going to Heaven, for no sin may enter Heaven. Not everything is in Scripture, some things are passed down my word... Some things may seem reasonable to man but in the end lead to destruction.

19. Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be entirely certain of it.

Purgatory isn't necessarily a 'place' it is a state of being. All going through Purgatory will go to Heaven. Purgatory is a 'Purge of Sins before entering Heaven'. The very definition of the word.

20. Therefore the pope, when he uses the words “plenary remission of all penalties,” does not actually mean “all penalties,” but only those imposed by himself.

The Church has the authority for things on earth. Here is a small excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia to attempt to clarify it (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07783a.htm)

"God alone knows what penalty remains to be paid and what its precise amount is in severity and duration. Finally, some indulgences are granted in behalf of the living only, while others may be applied in behalf of the souls departed. It should be noted, however, that the application has not the same significance in both cases. The Church in granting an indulgence to the living exercises her jurisdiction; over the dead she has no jurisdiction and therefore makes the indulgence available for them by way of suffrage (per modum suffragii), i.e. she petitions God to accept these works of satisfaction and in consideration thereof to mitigate or shorten the sufferings of the souls in Purgatory. "

21. Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.

No refs and pointless.

22. As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.

No refs and pointless. luther makes many wrong conclusions.

23. If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very few..

this is a wrong statement... if someone does not seek forgiveness, then how can they be forgiven? They have to pay the price.

24. For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.

No refs and pointless.

25. That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own diocese and parish.

No refs and pointless.

26. The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory, not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of intercession for them.

luther is calling Jesus a liar here... I see perfectly well in scripture that Jesus gave Peter the Keys to Heaven... (St. Matt 16:19) Peter's successor would also have those Keys... Hmmmm, who is that? Da Pope.

27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.

The Catholic Church does not teach this... No refs and a lie.

28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.

No refs and pointless. In luthers day, there were some bad bishops; but this does not make the Church bad, because the Church teaches what is true... We are all sinners...

29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.

No refs... and yes, all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed... that is a dumb question. That is equivalent of "who wants to go to Heaven?".... really... it's asinine to ask.

30. No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of having received plenary remission.

this shows that luther has doubts of the integrity of his contrition.... this man had issues.

31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.

One cannot 'buy' indulgences.... how does luther know the hearts of man???? Only God does.

32. Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

The Catholic Church does not give 'letter of indulgences' or teach any certainty of salvation... The Catholic Church teaches that we, like Paul, work out our salvation in fear and trembling....

33. Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.

No refs

34. For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of sacramental satisfaction established by man.

Things established by God through man...Jesus left us with a Church, not a book... He gave the authority to the Church.

35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.

This is what the Catholic Church teaches. luther blamed the Church for the sinners in the Church....

36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters..

No refs

37. Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.

No refs and luther doesn't even understand what an indulgence is.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.

luther is a liar.

51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.

luther is a liar.

52. It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.

luther does not understand what an indulgence is... salvation does not come by indulgences. salvation is from Jesus dying on the cross for us. An indulgence only has relative value... it's just a 'measure' of how the sinner is trying to make up for sins.

53. They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

This statment does not sound at all against the Church, but it is a statement against the 'enemies of Christ & enemies of the Pope'... it appears to be against some of the corruption of his time in his area.

54. Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.

this is not the way of the Catholic Church... again, corruption of his time in his area. I have never heard anything about indulgences during a Mass.

55. It is certainly the pope’s sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

This statement is saying that the Pope (of his time) believes that the Gospel of Christ is very important.

56. The "treasures of the Church," out of which the pope grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

Yes they are... According to Catholic doctrine, therefore, the source of indulgences is constituted by the merits of Christ and the saints. This treasury is left to the keeping, not of the individual Christian, but of the Church. Consequently, to make it available for the faithful, there is required an exercise of authority, which alone can determine in what way, on what terms, and to what extent, indulgences may be granted.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

It is obvious that luther did not understand Catholic teaching on indulgences. See the following links, most people, even some Catholics don't understand because they don't ask.

http://www.catholic-pages.com/dir/indulgences.asp

http://www.usbcc.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt2.htm

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

luther makes statements without any proof to back his statements, we can easily see the proof that backs the Catholic Teaching by asking a Catholic Source... (i.e. the Catechism, Priests, official Catholic website, etc...)

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church's poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

There are many treasures of the Catholic Church. St. Lawrence was loyal to the Pope.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;

There are many treasures of the Catholic Church.

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

The Pope is a tool of Christ. Christ works through men. The Pope is the leader of Christ's Church on Earth while Christ is not physically with us. The Pope is the successor of Peter, the authority that Peter had, is the pressent day Pope's.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

Where does luther get this comment from? This is only his opinion. There are many treasures of the Church and the Gospel is one of them.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

No point.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

He attacks indulgences then he backs them? The man was confused.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

Wrong. The Priests, Bishops, and Pope's, own nothing. They cannot will anything away. The money received from the rich, goes to the needs of the poor and the Church.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

Wrong. see comment to #65.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

Is that the teaching of the Church - No, it's not. The Church is made up of sinners, just as Christ & Paul warns us that some wolves and knaves will reach places of authority in the Church.... How can the Church teaching be judged on what the priest does, when the Church has told the priest otherwise? It can't.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

see comment on #67

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

How is this a point against the Catholic Church?

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

It's not a commission of the Pope. It is the commission of Christ. luther even knew the Catholic Church was the first Church, built by Christ. luther said the Church lost it's way due to a some corruption with a few bishops. luther did worse by leaving the True Church. He started a church to his own liking, built on his beleifs and not the teachings of the Apostles.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

What is the point? The Catholic Church teaches the Truths that the Apostles taught. luther has made his own church. Founding 1517 AD, not 33 AD.

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

The Catholic Church does gaurd against corrupt preachers.

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

There is no traffic of "pardons". There never was. What is wrong with those who gave to the poor to repent.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

This is a lie.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God—this is madness.

Luther shows that he believes that a sin is impossible to forgive? He seems to forget many things that Christ stateds. Such as the giving of the Keys of Heaven to Peter. What is madness was Luther started his church that bares his name, and claims to have the Truth of Christ when he rejected those sent by Christ.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

Luther had his own issues with sin. Of course people can still feel guilty for doing a sin, but that does not mean that they are unforgiven.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

The successor of Peter has the same authority as Peter. As has been taught since the martyrdom of Peter.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

Another pointless point. All men do not receive the same gifts.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

No one says such things.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

Luther should have focus more on his own accounts that he would have to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

Pointless point. "unbridled preaching of pardons" - Luther failed to realize that the Church is made up of sinners, and he was trying to get a splinter out of other's eyes, when he had a beam in his.

82. To wit: — "Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial."

Luther fails to preach truth yet attacks... if Luther really had the truth, he would not have had to post this 95 Thesis of lies. His church grew because people were ignorant and couldn't read and they took his word at face value, instead of researching it... not to mention that research would be virtually impossible for the common man of that time. Only the rich had books.

83. Again: — "Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

There is no need to pray for those in Heaven. They have already made it, it is they that pray for us.

84. Again: — "What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul's own need, free it for pure love's sake?"

God makes the rules, men don't. The Church is the protector of the Gospels, and knows them best. We don't change God because of what we think something should be like, we change for God.

85. Again: — "Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?"

It seems that Luther never understood what an indulgence really was.

86. Again: — "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?"

The Pope has never been rich. There have been a few (about 12 out of 265) Popes who abused their position, and lived off the Churches money greater than necessary. The Pope owns very little and has nothing to will away at death.

87. Again: — "What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?"

This is a show of total ignorance of what the Catholic Church teaches on the subject.

88. Again: — "What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?"

Luther again fails to realize the teachings of the Catholic Church.

89. "Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?"

Luther's many foolish questions were specifically written to lure true believers away from Christ (Acts 20:30), because if he really cared for an answer, he would have asked the Church, not post a list and run away holding his ears... and attacking the Church. For if he had asked and received bad answers, I'm sure he would have posted those also. This is much like the anti-Catholic argument that Purgatory is a lie because the word "Purgatory" is not in the bible... it just plays on the ignorance of people that do not know what Purgatory really is.

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

Refer to answer to number 89.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

The lessons of Christ are not philosophical. These doubts are created by Luther, who was not seeking answers to his questions, or he would not have left the Church.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace!

Luther was a man with serious problems. Refer to number 89.

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

Pointless point.

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

This just goes to show the lack of knowledege that Luther had because Christians do not follow Christ through Hell.

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.

Luther fails to remember that Christ said we must take up our cross. This entire 95 Thesis is a facade to lure away true believers (Acts 20:30). The 95 Thesis is a prime example that proves that Luther did not know what the Catholic Church taught.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is a travisty that anyone would take such arguments as true without even checking it out for themselves.

Your Servant in Christ,

ironmonk

[Theoketos]

Also, luther believed in poligamy... he married a man that was already married. his reasoning was if the man has two wife's then he would be less prone to adultary.... This is a major distortion of all Christian teaching on the matter

I think that you mean nun or woman, but you are right on about the "thesis"

I often wonder what good Luther would have done if he had stayed true to his vocation...

It is also interesting to note that most Luthern synods do not even follow Luther's teaching. Infact, the biggest stink Luther had about justification, no longer exsists...so what really was the point of the reformation?

May the Church be one!

[Bruce S]

Protestants answer in short replies.

Thus, the refutation of this post is that ONE HALF of all the Catholics in the entire world BELIEVED that Luther was right, and took a hike.

So, despite whatever answers you might have, they ignited a firestorm, and look what happened.

The Thesesis were just an invitation to a debate, grin, sort of like a post here on a discussion site.

Wow.

That was the POST OF THE MILLENIUM, look at the impact that one had.

Makes me jealous, no one I've ever met had a post that took off like that one did.

Imagine....

Converting OUT 1/2 of all the Catholics in the world with one post...and that included thousands of Priests, thousands of Monks, thousands of Nuns, and Bishops too. Presumably they understood the doctrinal differences, and had heard all the issues, and left.

Boggles the mind.

Edited December 28, 2003 by Bruce S

[ironmonk]

I think that you mean nun or woman, but you are right on about the "thesis"

I often wonder what good Luther would have done if he had stayed true to his vocation...

It is also interesting to note that most Luthern synods do not even follow Luther's teaching. Infact, the biggest stink Luther had about justification, no longer exsists...so what really was the point of the reformation?

May the Church be one!

Actually, no... Luther had someone who would come to confession to him all the time, and the guy "could not" stop commiting adultery, so Luther gave him a second wife.

Philip the Magnanimous (b. 23 Nov., 1504) was married before his twentieth year to Christina, daughter of Duke George of Saxony, who was then in her eighteenth year. He had the reputation of being "the most immoral of princelings", who ruined himself, in the language of his court theologians, by "unrestrained and promiscuous debauchery". He himself admits that he could not remain faithful to his wife for three consecutive weeks. The malignant attack of venereal disease, which compelled a temporary cessation of his profligacy, also directed his thoughts to a more ordinate gratification of his passions. His affections were already directed to Margaret von der Saal, a seventeen-year-old lady-in-waiting, and he concluded to avail himself of Luther's advice to enter a double marriage. Christina was "a woman of excellent qualities and noble mind, to whom, in excuse of his infidelities, he [Philip] ascribed all sorts of bodily infirmities and offensive habits" (Schmidt, "Melancthon", 367). She had borne him seven children. The mother of Margaret would only entertain the proposition of her daughter becoming Philip's "second wife" on condition that she, her brother, Philip's wife, Luther, Melancthon, and Bucer, or at least, two prominent theologians be present at the marriage. Bucer was entrusted with the mission of securing the consent of Luther, Melancthon and the Saxon princes. In this he was eminently successful. All was to be done under the veil of the profoundest secrecy. This secrecy Bucer enjoined on the landgrave again and again, even when on his journey to Wittenberg (3 Dec., 1539) that "all might redound to the glory of God" (Lenz, op. cit., I,119). Luther's position on the question was fully known to him. The latter's opportunism in turn grasped the situation at a glance. It was a question of expediency and necessity more than propriety and legality. If the simultaneous polygamy were permitted, it would prove an unprecendented act in the history of Christendom; it would, moreover, affix on Philip the brand of a most heinous crime, punishable under recent legislation with death by beheading. If refused, it threatened the defection of the landgrave, and would prove a calamity beyond reckoning to the Protestant cause.

Evidently in an embarrassing quandary, Luther and Melancthon filed their joint opinion (10 Dec., 1539). After expressing gratification at the landgrave's last recovery, "for the poor, miserable Church of Christ is small and forlorn, and stands in need of truly devout lords and rulers", it goes on to say that a general law that a "man may have more than one wife" could not be handed down, but that a dispensation could be granted. All knowledge of the dispensation and the marriage should be buried from the public in deadly silence. "All gossip on the subject is to be ignored, as long as we are right in conscience, and this we hold is right", for "what is permitted in the Mosaic law, is not forbidden in the Gospel" (De Wette-Seidemann, VI, 239-244; "Corp. Ref.", III, 856-863). The nullity and impossibility of the second marriage while the legality of the first remained untouched was not mentioned or hinted at. His wife, assured by her spiritual director "that it was not contrary to the law of God", gave her consent, though on her deathbed she confessed to her son that her consent was feloniously wrung from her. In return Philip pledged his princely word that she would be "the first and supreme wife" and that his matrimonial obligations "would be rendered her with more devotion than before". The children of Christina "should be considered the sole princes of Hesse" (Rommel, op. cit.). After the arrangement had already been completed, a daughter was born to Christina, 13 Feb., 1540. The marriage took place (4 March, 1540) in the presence of Bucer, Melancthon, and the court preacher Melander who performed the ceremony. Melander was "a bluff agitator, surly, with a most unsavoury moral reputation", one of his moral derelictions being the fact that he had three living wives, having deserted two without going through the formality of a legal separation. Philip lived with both wives, both of whom bore him children, the landgravine, two sons and a daughter, and Margaret six sons. How can this "darkest stain" on the history of the German Reformation be accounted for? Was it "politics, biblicism, distorted vision, precipitancy, fear of the near approaching Diet that played such a role in the sinful downfall of Luther?" Or was it the logical sequence of premises he had maintained for years in speech and print, not to touch upon the ethics of that extraordinary sermon on marriage? He himself writes defiantly that he "is not ashamed of his opinion" (Lauterbach, op. cit., 198). The marriage in spite of all precautions, injunctions, and pledges of secrecy leaked out, caused a national sensation and scandal, and set in motion an extensive correspondence between all intimately concerned, to neutralize the effect on the public mind. Melancthon "nearly died of shame, but Luther wished to brazen the matter out with a lie" (Cambridge Hist., II, 241). The secret "yea" must for the sake of the Christian Church remain a public "nay" (De Witte-Seidemann, op. cit., VI, 263). "What harm would there be, if a man to accomplish better things and for the sake of the Christian Church, does tell a good thumping lie" (Lenz, "Briefwechsel", I, 382; Kolde, "Analecta", 356), was his extenuating plea before the Hessian counsellors assembled at Eisenach (1540), a sentiment which students familiar with his words and actions will remember is in full agreement with much of his policy and many of his assertions. "We are convinced that the papacy is the seat of the real and actual Antichrist, and believe that against its deceit and iniquity everything is permitted for the salvation of souls" (De Wette, op. cit., I, 478).

Your Servant in Christ,

ironmonk

[ironmonk]

Protestants answer in short replies.

Thus, the refutation of this post is that ONE HALF of all the Catholics in the entire world BELIEVED that Luther was right, and took a hike.

So, despite whatever answers you might have, they ignited a firestorm, and look what happened.

The Thesesis were just an invitation to a debate, grin, sort of like a post here on a discussion site.

Wow.

That was the POST OF THE MILLENIUM, look at the impact that one had.

Makes me jealous, no one I've ever met had a post that took off like that one did.

Imagine....

Converting OUT 1/2 of all the Catholics in the world with one post...and that included thousands of Priests, thousands of Monks, thousands of Nuns, and Bishops too. Presumably they understood the doctrinal differences, and had heard all the issues, and left.

Boggles the mind.

Bruce,

It boggles your mind because you do not know the facts and lack study. It appears that the short answers come from a lack of study and a lack of history. The oldest protestant church only goes back to 1517 anyway. The One Faith is not as shallow as you like to believe, it is deeper than you can imagine.

1/2 of Catholics did not leave... whoever told you that was grossly wrong. If half of Catholics left, then why does the Catholic Church have roughly three times as many members as all the 34,000+ protestant churches together.

People have left Christianity for Islam, does that make Islam right?

Also, what boggles the mind is to be proud of such division when the Apostles clearly spoke about unity and One Faith. By the time of Luther's death, there were already hundreds of divisions... This was not the work of a holy man....

Acts 20:30 And from your own group, men will come forward perverting the truth to draw the disciples away after them.

Acts 20:30 speaks volumes.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm

Catherine proved to be a plain, frugal, domestic housewife; her interest in her fowls, piggery, fish-pond, vegetable garden, home-brewery, were deeper and more absorbing than in the most gigantic undertakings of her husband. Occasional bickerings with her neighbours and the enlistment of her husband's intervention in personal interests and biases, were frequent enough to engage the tongue of public censure. She died at Torgau (20 Dec., 1552) in comparative obscurity, poverty, and neglect, having found Wittenberg cold and unsympathetic to the reformer's family. This he had predicted, "after my death the four elements in Wittenberg will not tolerate you after all". Luther's rugged health began to show marks of depleting vitality and unchecked inroads of disease. Prolonged attacks of dyspepsia, nervous headaches, chronic granular kidney disease, gout, sciatic rheumatism, middle ear abscesses, above all vertigo and gall stone colic were intermittent or chronic ailments that gradually made him the typical embodiment of a supersensitively nervous, prematurely old man. These physical impairments were further aggravated by his notorious disregard of all ordinary dietetic or hygienic restrictions. Even prescinding from his congenital heritage of inflammable irascibility and uncontrollable rage, besetting infirmities that grew deeper and more acute with age, his physical condition in itself would measurably account for his increasing irritation, passionate outbreaks, and hounding suspicions, which in his closing days became a problem more of pathological or psychopathic interest, than biographic or historical importance.

It was this "terrible temper" which brought on the tragedy of alienation, that drove from him his most devoted friends and zealous co-labourers. Every contradiction set him ablaze. "Hardly one of us", in the lament of one of his votaries, "can escape Luther's anger and his public scourging" (Corp. Ref., V, 314). Carlstadt parted with himm in 1522, after what threatened to be a personal encounter; Melancthon in plaintive tones speaks of his passionate violence, self-will, and tyranny, and does not mince words in confessing the humiliation of his ignoble servitude; Bucer, prompted by political and diplomatic motives, prudently accepts the inevitable "just as the Lord bestowed him on us"; Zwingli "has become a pagan, Oecolampadius...and the other heretics have in-devilled, through-devilled, over-devilled corrupt hearts and lying mouths, and no one should pray for them", all of them "were brought to their death by the fiery darts and spears of the devil" (Walch, op. cit., XX, 223); Calvin and the Reformed are also the possessors of "in-deviled, over-devilled, and through-devilled hearts"; Schurf, the eminent jurist, was changed from an ally to an opponent, with a brutality that defies all explanation or apology; Agricola fell a prey to a repugnance that time did not soften; Schwenkfeld, Armsdorf, Cordatus, all incurred his ill will, forfeited his friendship, and became the butt of his stinging speech. "The Luther, who from a distance was still honoured as the hero and leader of the new church, was only tolerated at its centre in consideration of his past services" (Ranke, op. cit., II, 421). The zealous band of men, who once clustered about their standard-bearer, dwindled to an insignificant few, insignificant in number, intellectuality, and personal prestige. A sense of isolation palled the days of his decline. It not alone affected his disposition, but played the most astonishing pranks with his memory. The oftener he details to his table companions, the faithful chroniclers who gave us his "Tischreden", the horrors of the papacy, the more starless does the night of his monastic life appear. "The picture of his youth grows darker and darker. He finally becomes a myth to himself. Not only do dates shift themselves, but also facts. When the old man drops into telling tales, the past attains the plasticity of wax. He ascribes the same words promiscuously now to this, now to that friend or enemy" (Hausrath, op.cit., II, 432).

Yor Servant in Christ,

ironmonk

[Circle_Master]

1/2 of Catholics did not leave... whoever told you that was grossly wrong. If half of Catholics left, then why does the Catholic Church have roughly three times as many members as all the 34,000+ protestant churches together.

try to keep your numbers decent too...

the latest barna poll .. darnit, the stupid thing is timing out and I need to go.

anyway,

the last survey took a sample of ""The data described above are from telephone interviews with a nationwide random sample of 2033 adults conducted during September through November 2003.""

and tested for

"Jesus Christ lived a sinless life; God is the all-powerful and all-knowing Creator of the universe and He stills rules it today; salvation is a gift from God and cannot be earned; Satan is real; a Christian has a responsibility to share their faith in Christ with other people; and the Bible is accurate in all of its teachings.""

as a standard for a biblical worldview

the results came back

""The research indicated that everyone has a worldview, but relatively few people have a biblical worldview - even among devoutly religious people. The survey discovered that only 9% of born again Christians have such a perspective on life. The numbers were even lower among other religious classifications: Protestants (7%), adults who attend mainline Protestant churches (2%) and Catholics (less than one-half of 1%). The denominations that produced the highest proportions of adults with a biblical worldview were non-denominational Protestant churches (13%), Pentecostal churches (10%) and Baptist churches (8%).""

if there really are 3x as many 'Catholics' then it doesn't matter because 99.5% of them don't understand what the church teaches, and the same for 93% of protestants. That means if you have 600 Catholics, only 3 actually believe, and if you have 1/3, 200 Protestants then 14 actually believe, so the numbers are higher anyway. Having a group larger that 'SAYS' they care something doesn't really matter.

And, if I am not mistaken, the numbers are not 3x to 1 as you said, I believe the latest figure was much closer. Just a warning to watch your data, you're throwing in false stuff with decent stuff to try to make a point.

[Bruce S]

yeah, I use Barna all the time.

From a Catholic perspective, they are not the best, they have an Evangelical Protestant bent. I know that, but the surveys are interesting anyway.

What shows up, is the differences between EVANGELICAL [not all the others] PROTESTANTS versus Catholics.

I found the surveys dealing with financial support interesting too, it showed Evangelicals supporting financially around ten times the level of gross income as Catholics.

FWIW.

[dUSt]

I found the surveys dealing with financial support interesting too, it showed Evangelicals supporting financially around ten times the level of gross income as Catholics.

This might have something to do with the Catholic mass not being a fundraising campaign.

[beng]

Hmmm, having seen Bruce S since the reformation thread.

Should I rebuke him here too? what to do, what to do :noidea:

Edited December 29, 2003 by beng

[Robyn]

The 95 Thesis is a prime example that proves that Luther did not know what the Catholic Church taught.

He KNEW...

[Anna]

70. But still more are they (bishops and curates) bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

Maybe Luther should've practiced what he preached!

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

Next, he accurses himself....

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God—this is madness.

And today his followers would say that calling Mary the "Mother of God" is a heresy!

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

Oh brother, and this guy has the nerve to say that the Deuterocanonicals are "uninspired?!"

Do you notice that the majority of Luther's thesis seem to focus in on MONEY? Apparently he didn't realize that man cannot serve two masters.

Telephone surveys????????

We don't need no stankin' telephone surveys!!!!!!

Pax Christi. <><

[ironmonk]

He KNEW...

:thatsfunny: :slap: :: :D

No he didn't.... Can you read? Here are the resources that you can look the stuff up yourself...

http://www.Catholic.com

http://www.ScriptureCatholic.com

http://www.NewAdvent.org

http://www.Catholic-Pages.com

http://www.USCCB.org

Take note:

"We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we received it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all."

~ Martin Luther, Commentary on St. John

-ironmonk

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Thus, the refutation of this post is that ONE HALF of all the Catholics in the entire world BELIEVED that Luther was right, and took a hike.

So, despite whatever answers you might have, they ignited a firestorm, and look what happened.

1/2 the Catholics didn't leave. And if they did, it wasn't on their own accord. It was because the princes and kings of Europe were trying to avoid the Pope's political influence. They couldn't have cared less what Luther was preaching, their motives weren't religious in nature.

"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves."

Matthew 7:15

Edited December 30, 2003 by thedude

[Anna]

Those theses really just sound like Luther was trying to make a name for himself. Well, he succeeded! I hope he's happy...(but somehow, I rather doubt it...)

His arguments are repetitive whinings about money-grubbing people misrepresenting proper Church authorities, and a pompous attempt at writing parodies of sacred proverbs, which seems to be a protestant sport. The sins of the fathers are passed down over the generations.

Remember recently Bruce S or Circle Master was quoting a book entitled, "Upon this slippery rock," an unsavory parody of the words of Jesus Christ...

Oh, the pride of these men!

Robyn, what makes you even think he had a clue about what True Catholic Teaching is? In all 95 of those thesis, he didn't correctly address a single one!

Pax Christi. <><

Edited December 30, 2003 by Anna

[Circle_Master]

Ironmonk, am I really to believe that a man who grew up in the Catholic Church, attending seminary in the Catholic Church, was allowed to teach in the Catholic Church never understood what the Catholic Church taught? And that no one he ever dealt with ever figured out he was so blinded until after he left? I find that very difficult to believe, especially for one considered so intelligent and having done so well through his schooling.