I Certainly Don't Think Hitler Was As Bad As Luther

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='SpareTime' post='1651649' date='Sep 9 2008, 06:19 PM']I wondered that too, as the Church certainly doesn't seem to make the statement that there is no such thing as a repentant protestant or no such thing as a protestant who truly loves God. I mean isn't this board supposed to be ecumenical?[/quote]


I think people really need to step ack from whatthey think they know about Church teaching.... Our Seperated Brethren are exactly that Seperated. I have REPEATEDLY stated that I do not make any judgements on the fate of individuals and their judgement, not even my own ( alright especially not my own). But if you would like I will show you all kinds of DOGMATIC statements which say that Protestant heresies and those who hold them are Anathamized. Similarly I can show you numerous Church statements saying that outside of the Church there is no Salvation... which of course I have already explained at length as meaning that all who are saved come to God through the Church and that for a person not formally in the Church to meet that requirment they wold need to be invinsibly ignorant.... Now [i]it is my opinion[/i] that this is a virtual impossiblity in the Modern Western world, [i]but I not say [/i]"hey the Church says that there are no invincibly ignorant protestants"


I don't recall saying that there were no protestants that really loved God, I said loving God was not a gaurantee of salvation, and that it was indeed not enough for salvation. I would direct you to the Council of trents teachig on salvation.

[SpareTime]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' post='1652063' date='Sep 9 2008, 11:55 PM']Similarly I can show you numerous Church statements saying that outside of the Church there is no Salvation... which of course I have already explained at length as meaning that all who are saved come to God through the Church and that for a person not formally in the Church to meet that requirment they wold need to be invinsibly ignorant.... Now [i]it is my opinion[/i] that this is a virtual impossiblity in the Modern Western world, [i]but I not say [/i]"hey the Church says that there are no invincibly ignorant protestants"[/quote]

Maybe you should bold the parts where you preface it with your opinion, that makes it much clearer, but I imagine some people stop reading after certain controversial statements. I am of the opinion that your opinion statements hurt the Church, not help her, but again that is only my opinion.

[rkwright]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' post='1652063' date='Sep 9 2008, 11:55 PM']I think people really need to step ack from whatthey think they know about Church teaching.... Our Seperated Brethren are exactly that Seperated. I have REPEATEDLY stated that I do not make any judgements on the fate of individuals and their judgement, not even my own ( alright especially not my own). But if you would like I will show you all kinds of DOGMATIC statements which say that Protestant heresies and those who hold them are Anathamized. Similarly I can show you numerous Church statements saying that outside of the Church there is no Salvation... which of course I have already explained at length as meaning that all who are saved come to God through the Church and [b]that for a person not formally in the Church to meet that requirment they wold need to be invinsibly ignorant[/b].... Now [i]it is my opinion[/i] that this is a virtual impossiblity in the Modern Western world, [i]but I not say [/i]"hey the Church says that there are no invincibly ignorant protestants"


I don't recall saying that there were no protestants that really loved God, I said loving God was not a gaurantee of salvation, and that it was indeed not enough for salvation. I would direct you to the Council of trents teachig on salvation.[/quote]

I would like to see a dogmatic statement saying what I bolded in your statement. That is I'd like to see where the Church teaches that the only way those outside the visible Church can be saved is through invincible ignorance.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='pan!c139' post='1651711' date='Sep 9 2008, 07:18 PM']Hitler was by far worse. [color="#FF0000"][i]Luther merely broke away from the Church and started his own religion.[/i] [/color]He had morals and principle. Hitler, on the other hand, declared that only a certain type of people were human beings, and anyone different than that certain type deserved to die. All hell broke loose on earth because of Hitler. He was evil and malicious. Luther was neither evil nor malicious.[/quote]


I don't even think a real response is needed here. Go back and read what you said..... what exactly could posibly be MORE evil than starting your own religion... unless you are going to tell me that physical death is worse than Spiritual--- Eternal Death. And by the by, Luther hated Jews, I mean he HATED them. I think you all should go find some contempary sources on the reformation and see what actually happened in 16th century Germany when Luther decided he knew more than Christ about founding a Church.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1652066' date='Sep 9 2008, 11:00 PM']I would like to see a dogmatic statement saying what I bolded in your statement. That is I'd like to see where the Church teaches that the only way those outside the visible Church can be saved is through invincible ignorance.[/quote]

Doesn't exactly say "We declare, define and teach" or "Anathema sit" but it's the teaching of an Ecumenical Council.

'Christus enim ipse «necessitatem fidei et baptismi expressis verbis inculcando, necessitatem Ecclesiae, in quam homines per baptismum tamquam per ianuam intrant, simul confirmavit. Quare illi homines salvari non possent, qui Ecclesiam Catholicam a Deo per Iesum Christum ut necessariam esse conditam non ignorantes, tamen vel in eam intrare, vel in eadem perseverare noluerint». Etsi ergo Deus viis sibi notis homines Evangelium sine eorum culpa ignorantes ad fidem adducere possit, sine qua impossibile est Ipsi placere, Ecclesiae tamen necessitas incumbit.' (Ad Gentes, 7)

'For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it." Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16)'

Edited September 10, 2008 by StThomasMore

[rkwright]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1652072' date='Sep 10 2008, 12:05 AM']For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel. (Ad Gentes, 7)[/quote]

Don't forget 838 STM

Edit: Once you edited your post I wasn't sure if you were aware but that is the language of the CCC 847-848.

I guess the EO who are close enough in communion to celebrate the eucharist with aren't close enough to get to heaven.

Edited September 10, 2008 by rkwright

[SpareTime]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1652072' date='Sep 10 2008, 12:05 AM']"For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who [size=3][color="#FF0000"]though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary[/color][/size], still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16)"[/quote]

I do not know a single protestant who believes that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. I am pretty sure anyone who sincerely believed that the Catholic Church is God's true church with the fulness of truth would convert.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1652076' date='Sep 9 2008, 11:10 PM']Don't forget 838 STM [/quote]

Huh?

[Maggyie]

[quote name='Delivery Boy' post='1651921' date='Sep 9 2008, 11:44 PM']So you are telling me that anyone attending a church other then a catholic church is not going to acheive salvation ?
And again for the 100th time im talking about people attending these churches who have a relationshiop with Christ and are not defiant towards the catholic church.
So answer that question, its really a simple yes or no.[/quote]

These are good people you are talking about and I have members of my family who fall into the same boat. God loves them and the relationship they have with Christ is precious in the sight of the Lord. However if they are one day saved it will not be because of their membership in a Protestant church or any other faith community. That is not enough. They will only be saved because they were somehow members of the Catholic Church maybe without even realizing it - they were Catholic on the inside, they had Catholic souls, even though on the outside they were still Protestant and perhaps even still thought of themselves as Protestant.

Catholicism is a both/and religion. Faith AND works is how we are supposed to look at it, not faith OR works. If we don't have the works to back up our faith we can't be saved. As Jesus says in Matthew 25:34-46:

[quote]“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”[/quote]

Notice they address Him as "Lord." The acknowledge him as Lord and Savior but their walk did not parallel that of Christ and so it avails them nothing. Of course we can not win our way into Heaven by just doing good works without any faith. That would be another instance of works OR faith. You have to be two for two! You probably are already aware of this, I was actually just ruminating on this after a conversation with someone else and I just had to post it

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='SpareTime' post='1652077' date='Sep 9 2008, 11:10 PM']I do not know a single protestant who believes that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. I am pretty sure anyone who sincerely believed that the Catholic Church is God's true church with the fulness of truth would convert.[/quote]

Edit: The quote actually doesn't use the words "believe" it uses the word "aware". Go reread it.

Edited September 10, 2008 by StThomasMore

[rkwright]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1652078' date='Sep 10 2008, 12:12 AM']Huh?[/quote]

see my edit above..

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1652076' date='Sep 9 2008, 11:10 PM']Don't forget 838 STM

Edit: Once you edited your post I wasn't sure if you were aware but that is the language of the CCC 847-848.

I guess the EO who are close enough in communion to celebrate the eucharist with aren't close enough to get to heaven.[/quote]

The only editing I did was some formatting, deleting the footnote numbers and adding the Latin.

But in any case it doesn't say were close enough to celebrate the Eucharist at all, the CCC says that 'With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."' (CCC 838)

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1652066' date='Sep 10 2008, 01:00 AM']I would like to see a dogmatic statement saying what I bolded in your statement. That is I'd like to see where the Church teaches that the only way those outside the visible Church can be saved is through invincible ignorance.[/quote]

I didn't say i could show a Dogmatic teaching on that, I am not sure I can find a Dogmatic statement whcih is that kind, I can find Dogmatic statments which are harsher, but it was Papal encyclicals where Invincible ignorance was explained certianly Doctrinal statments should be available.

Lets look at the harsher ones first just to make sure we are all on the same page.
[[color="#FF0000"]b]There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice[/b][/color]4th Lateran Council---- the line right before transubstantiation is defined.

[b][color="#FF0000"]Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff. [/b][/color] Unam Sanctum Many debate the Dogmatic nature of this statement, but judging from the emphatic defining nature in light of the doctrine of infallability since defined I think it ia pretty hard case to make that it is not. Certianly for hundreds of Years other popes held it to be Dogmatic.


20. So, in accordance with your pastoral care, work assiduously to protect and preserve this faith. Never cease to instruct all men in it, to encourage the wavering, to convince dissenters, to strengthen the weak in faith by never tolerating and letting pass anything which could in the slightest degree defile the purity of this faith. [color="#FF0000"][i]With the same great strength of mind, foster in all men their unity with the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation;[/i][/color] also foster their obedience towards this See of Peter on which rests the entire structure of our most holy religion. See to it with similar firmness that the most holy laws of the Church are observed, for it is by these laws that virtue, religion and piety particularly thrive and flourish.
Blessed Pope Pius IX QUI PLURIBUS


I recomend the entire papal BullPope Eugene IV which was supported by the Ecumenical Council of Florence and is therfore Dogmatic But here is a particularly harsh part.

It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.


Now for the Moderation of Invincible Ignorance we turn to Blessed Pius the IX

7. These are the people whom the Church seeks to bring back to sound reasoning with these words: "What is there more contrary to reason than to seek to exalt oneself above reason by means of reason itself? And what is more contrary to faith than to not want to believe that which we cannot attain by reason?"[15] She never ceases to repeat to them that faith bases itself not on reason but on authority[16] because it is not suitable that God, in speaking to mankind, should use arguments, as if we could refuse to believe. Rather, He spoke as was appropriate, as the supreme judge of everything, who does not have to argue but who rather issues His pronouncements.[17] [color="#FF0000"]The Church clearly declares that the only hope of salvation for mankind is placed in the Christian faith, which teaches the truth, scatters the darkness of ignorance by the splendor of its light, and works through love. This hope of salvation is placed in the Catholic Church which, in preserving the true worship, is the solid home of this faith and the temple of God. Outside of the Church, nobody can hope for life or salvation unless he is excused through ignorance beyond his control. [/color]The Church teaches and proclaims that if sometimes we can use human wisdom to study the divine word, our wisdom should not for that reason proudly usurp to itself the right of master. Rather, it should act as an obedient and submissive servant, afraid of erring if it goes first and afraid of losing the light of interior virtue and the straight path of truth by following the consequences of exterior words.[18]

SINGULARI QUIDEM



Is that enough? or is more required... if so it will probably not be able to come until Thursday, I don't get home till near 11 on Wednesday

Edited September 10, 2008 by Don John of Austria

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='SpareTime' post='1652077' date='Sep 10 2008, 01:10 AM']I do not know a single protestant who believes that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. I am pretty sure anyone who sincerely believed that the Catholic Church is God's true church with the fulness of truth would convert.[/quote]


Now theres the question isn't that... is belief or knowledge what makes one ignorant?

I am not a cradle Catholic. I know lots and lots of protestants who know good and well that Christ founded the Catholic Church. I know for a fact that some Methodist Colleges taught exactly that in required theology classes through out the 50's and 60's. But if they choose not to believe it?

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1651917' date='Sep 9 2008, 10:43 PM']I can see why Luther was as evil as Hitler.

[url="http://newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm"]http://newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm[/url]

Luther's Racism

The magazine Christian History, Issue 39, 1993 (published by Christianity Today) devoted a whole issue to Martin Luther's life and legacy. Pages 38-39 quote his work On the Jews and Their Lies which gives us an idea about how moral Luther's views were:

"Set fire to their synagogues and schools. Jewish houses should be razed and destroyed, and Jewish prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, curing, and blasphemy are taught, [should] be taken from them." Their rabbis [should] be forbidden to teach on pain of loss of life and limb."

This is a man held to be a moral authority? Luther also urged that "safe conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews," and that "all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them." What Jews could do was to have "a flail, an ax, a hole, a spade" put into their hands so "young, strong Jews and Jewesses" could "earn their bread in the sweat of their brow." Do you think any Fuhrer you may have heard of might have gleaned an idea or two from that last passage alone? In fact, think of Hitler while reading the next paragraph.

Luther proposed seven measures of "sharp mercy" that German princes could take against Jews: (1) burn their schools and synagogues; (2) transfer Jews to community settlements; (3) confiscate all Jewish literature, which was blasphemous; (4) prohibit rabbis to teach, on pain of death; (5) deny Jews safe conduct, so as to prevent the spread of Judaism; (6) appropriate their wealth and use it to support converts and to prevent the Jews' practice of usury; (7) assign Jews to manual labor as a form of penance.

Is there no clearer blueprint for the Final Solution than the works of one of christianity's greatest reformers and moralists?

Worse yet, Luther was no paper philosopher - he advised clergy, their congregations, and all government officials to help carry out these measures. Since most Jews had been expelled from Germany before 1536, Luther's counsel was implemented by few officials. Yet a harsh anti-Jewish measure in 1543 mentioned Luther's On the Jews and Their Lies.

Both Luther's friends and his foes criticized him for proposing these measures. His best friends begged him to stop his anti-Jewish raving, but Luther continued his attacks in other treatises. He repeated as true the worst anti-Semitic charges from medieval literature: that Jews killed Christian babies; they murdered Christ over and over again by stabbing eucharistic hosts; they poised wells. As usual, he did not allow facts to deter him from his emotionally driven lies.

Luther now thought what he had accused Catholics of thinking in 1523: Jews were dogs. "We are at fault for not slaying them!" he fumed shortly before his death. Yet one more hypocricy for the master of hypocrisy.

While my argument does not rely solely on demonstrating that the writings of Luther inspired the holocaust (Instead, it implicates Hitler's use of christianity's long history of christian persecution of jews), the following passages come from: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_and_the_Jews"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_and_the_Jews[/url] help demonstrate Luther's role in the holocaust.

British historian Paul Johnson has called On the Jews and their Lies the "first work of modern anti-Semitism, and a giant step forward on the road to the Holocaust." (Johnson, A History of the Jews, p. 242.)

While some Lutherans deny the charge, the Nazis did cite Luther's treatise to justify the Final Solution (Egil Grislis, "Martin Luther and the Jews," Consensus 27 (2001) No. 1:64.).

The line of "anti-Semitic descent" from Luther to Hitler is "easy to draw," according to American historian Lucy Dawidowicz. In her "The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945", she writes that both Luther and Hitler were obsessed by the "demonologized universe" inhabited by Jews, with Hitler asserting that the later Luther, the author of On the Jews and Their Lies was the 'real Luther'.

Professor Robert Michael, Professor Emeritus of European History at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, has argued that Luther scholars who try to tone down Luther's views on the Jews ignore the murderous implications of his antisemitism. Michael argues that there is a "strong parallel" between Luther's ideas and the anti-Semitism of most German Lutherans throughout the Holocaust. Like the Nazis, Luther mythologized the Jews as evil, he writes. They could be saved only if they converted to Christianity, but their hostility to the idea made it inconceivable (Robert Michael, "Luther, Luther Scholars, and the Jews," Encounter 46:4 (Autumn 1985), pp. 339-56.).

Luther's sentiments were widely echoed in the Germany of the 1930s, particularly within the Nazi party. Hitler's Education Minister, Bernhard Rust, was quoted by the Völkischer Beobachter as saying that: "Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance ... I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]" (Volkischer Beobachter, August 25, 1933 cited in Steigmann-Gall, Richard. The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1991-1945. Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 136-7.).

Hans Hinkel, leader of the Luther League's magazine Deutsche Kultur-Wacht, and of the Berlin chapter of the Kampfbund, paid tribute to Luther in his acceptance speech as head of both the Jewish section and the film department of Goebbel's Chamber of Culture and Propaganda Ministry. "Through his acts and his spiritual attitude, he began the fight which we will wage today; with Luther, the revolution of German blood and feeling against alien elements of the Volk was begun. To continue and complete his Protestantism, nationalism must make the picture of Luther, of a German fighter, live as an example above the barriers of confession for all German blood comrades."
(Steigmann-Gall 2003, p. 137.).

According to Daniel Goldhagen, Bishop Martin Sasse, a leading Protestant churchman, published a compendium Luther's writings shortly after Kristallnacht in which Sasse "applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day, writing in the introduction, "On November 10, 1938, on Luther's birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany." The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words "of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews." (Bernd Nellessen, "Die schweigende Kirche: Katholiken und Judenverfolgung," in Büttner (ed), Die Deutchschen und die Jugendverfolg im Dritten Reich, p. 265, cited in Daniel Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners (Vintage, 1997)).

William Nichols, Professor of Religious Studies, recounts, "At his trial in Nuremberg after the Second World War, Julius Streicher, the notorious Nazi propagandist, editor of the scurrilous antisemitic weekly, Der Stürmer, argued that if he should be standing there arraigned on such charges, so should Martin Luther. Reading such passages, it is hard not to agree with him. Luther's proposals read like a program for the Nazis." (William Nichols, Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1995), p. 271).

In the course of the Luthertag (Luther Day) festivities, the Nazis emphasized their connection to Luther as being both nationalist revolutionaries and the heirs of the German traditionalist past. An article in the Chemnitzer Tageblatt stated that "[t]he German Volk are united not only in loyalty and love for the Fatherland, but also once more in the old German beliefs of Luther [Lutherglauben]; a new epoch of strong, conscious religious life has dawned in Germany." Richard Steigmann-Gall wrote in his 2003 book The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945:

The leadership of the Protestant League espoused a similar view. Fahrenhorst, who was on the planning committee of the Luthertag, called Luther "the first German spiritual Führer" who spoke to all Germans regardless of clan or confession. In a letter to Hitler, Fahrenhorst reminded him that his "Old Fighters" were mostly Protestants and that it was precisely in the Protestant regions of our Fatherland" in which Nazism found its greatest strength. Promising that the celebration of Luther's birthday would not turn into a confessional affair, Fahrenhorst invited Hitler to become the official patron of the Luthertag. In subsequent correspondence, Fahrenhorst again voiced the notion that reverence for Luther could somehow cross confessional boundaries: "Luther is truly not only the founder of a Christian confession; much more, his ideas had a fruitful impact on all Christianity in Germany." Precisely because of Luther's political as well as religious significance, the Luthertag would serve as a confession both "to church and Volk." (Richard Steigmann-Gall, The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945, (Cambridge University Press, 2003), p.138.)

from the rationalist website.[/quote]


Ah thank You CMOM I'm touched