Martin Luther Not A Heretic?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1474766' date='Mar 9 2008, 08:58 PM']What did you read as a Protestant? That word doesn't mean much, except a Christian who isn't Catholic or Orthodox.[/quote]
I read the writings of Calvin (his [i]Institutes[/i] and various homiletic writings), Luther (his writings on free will, commentaries on scripture, [i]On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church[/i], the [i]Schmalkald Articles[/i], etc.), Confessional texts from the Lutheran and Presbyterian traditions, Zwingli's [i]On Baptism, Rebaptism and Infant Baptism[/i], and the writings of other Protestant authors from the 16th century up to modern times. I also read texts from the Anglican tradition (both from the Latitudinarians and the Oxford Movement), having spent about two years as an Anglo-Catholic prior to my conversion to Roman Catholicism in 1987. Finally, beginning in the year 2001 I started reading Eastern Orthodox theologians, both ancient and modern, and this led to my request for transfer from the Roman Church to the Ruthenian Church, which was granted on Lazarus Saturday in 2005.

That said, in my opinion Luther was a theological nominalist, because his theology betrays a reductionist attitude that ultimately distorts the mystery of God, both in relation to the Trinity and the Incarnation of the eternal Logos, while his theory of justification is even more reprehensible, since it posits the false idea that the grace of God merely covers over a man's sins without actually having any ontological effect upon his existence. As a Byzantine Catholic I could never subscribe to such a theory, since the Eastern Fathers taught that man truly, and not in mere appearance, becomes divine by his participation in the uncreated energies of the Holy Trinity.

Edited March 10, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Aloysius]

[url="http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=57062"]Rehabilitating Luther: A London Times Theory[/url]

The story isn't worth the ink that was used to print it. I will now make a bold prediction: nothing will come of this story.

[N/A Gone]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1474848' date='Mar 10 2008, 01:14 AM']That said, in my opinion Luther was a theological nominalist, because his theology betrays a reductionist attitude that ultimately distorts the mystery of God, both in relation to the Trinity and the Incarnation of the eternal Logos, while his theory of justification is even more reprehensible, since it posits the false idea that the grace of God merely covers over a man's sins without actually having any ontological effect upon his existence. As a Byzantine Catholic I could never subscribe to such a theory, since the Eastern Fathers taught that man truly, and not in mere appearance, becomes divine by his participation in the uncreated energies of the Holy Trinity.[/quote]

WOw, can I quote that?

[Laudate_Dominum]

Here is a transcript of a conversation I had with a professor back when I was a total n00b.

Me: That sounds pretty close to the views of the heretic Martin Luther.
Prof: <dumbfounded> ... <dramatic pause with blank stare> ...
Me: You don't agree?
Prof: Martin Luther was a great reformer!!
Me: ... Ok, so I guess I didn't get an A on that paper.

What should have happened:

Me: That sounds pretty close to the views of the heretic Martin Luther.
Prof: <dumbfounded> ... <dramatic pause with blank stare> ...
Me: You don't agree?
Prof: Martin Luther was a great reformer!!
Me: Martin Luther was an excommunicant!!
Prof: Why, *gaf* how dare you..
Me: No sir! How dare you!!
Prof: Get out of my office!
Me: With pleasure you unfortunate scalawag! And may God have mercy on your soul.

[N/A Gone]

I assume there is a great story behind that.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1474848' date='Mar 10 2008, 02:14 AM']I read the writings of Calvin (his [i]Institutes[/i] and various homiletic writings), Luther (his writings on free will, commentaries on scripture, [i]On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church[/i], the [i]Schmalkald Articles[/i], etc.), Confessional texts from the Lutheran and Presbyterian traditions, Zwingli's [i]On Baptism, Rebaptism and Infant Baptism[/i], and the writings of other Protestant authors from the 16th century up to modern times. I also read texts from the Anglican tradition (both from the Latitudinarians and the Oxford Movement), having spent about two years as an Anglo-Catholic prior to my conversion to Roman Catholicism in 1987. Finally, beginning in the year 2001 I started reading Eastern Orthodox theologians, both ancient and modern, and this led to my request for transfer from the Roman Church to the Ruthenian Church, which was granted on Lazarus Saturday in 2005.

That said, in my opinion Luther was a theological nominalist, because his theology betrays a reductionist attitude that ultimately distorts the mystery of God, both in relation to the Trinity and the Incarnation of the eternal Logos, while his theory of justification is even more reprehensible, since it posits the false idea that the grace of God merely covers over a man's sins without actually having any ontological effect upon his existence. As a Byzantine Catholic I could never subscribe to such a theory, since the Eastern Fathers taught that man truly, and not in mere appearance, becomes divine by his participation in the uncreated energies of the Holy Trinity.[/quote]

Sounds like you know what you're talking about then. Seems like a lot of Catholics take their very limited experience of Protestantism at some snake-handling tent meeting and presume everyone from Lutherans to non-denominational Christians must be just like those folks because they're all Protestant. That's the impression I get anyway.

I'm curious why you find Calvinism boring? When I was praying about and contemplating on what I should believe as a Christian, I was torn primarily between Catholicism and Calvinism. From a Sola Scriptura point of view, Calvinism seemed to make the most sense, and was intellectual though simple at the same time. The primary question was whether Tradition should be on par with Scripture, and obviously that's what I found and therefore had to choose Catholicism.

Anyway, that's interesting what you say about Luther's theological nominalism. However, since this is dealing with justification, aren't Lutherans today in line with Catholicism since the common statement on justification was signed?

Edited March 13, 2008 by LouisvilleFan

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1476471' date='Mar 12 2008, 06:55 PM']I'm curious why you find Calvinism boring? When I was praying about and contemplating on what I should believe as a Christian, I was torn primarily between Catholicism and Calvinism.[/quote]
My views on Calvinism have been influenced greatly by my move into Eastern Christianity, which – in opposition to Calvinism – holds absolutely to the freedom of the natural will in man, and to the goodness of human nature even after the fall. In Byzantine theology there is no such thing as a "sin nature," because sin is unnatural, not natural.

Finally, as far as Calvinism being boring is concerned, I find it boring because it is rationalistic and its theology is over-systematized, which ends up drawing the faith down into the realm of diastemic conception, and – of course – its predestinarianism is truly disgusting to me.

Edited March 13, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1476471' date='Mar 12 2008, 06:55 PM']Anyway, that's interesting what you say about Luther's theological nominalism. However, since this is dealing with justification, aren't Lutherans today in line with Catholicism since the common statement on justification was signed?[/quote]
It depends on whether or not you believe that the "Joint Declaration on Justification" says anything of substance. Personally, I do not think that it does; and, in fact, I do not subscribe to any particular theory of "justification," because for me as an Eastern Christian man's salvation involves his assimilation to God through the uncreated divine energies, i.e., it involves his divinization, which is not reducible to any of the existing Western theories of "justification" imputed or infused.

Edited March 13, 2008 by Apotheoun

[N/A Gone]

I agree with you on calvinism, and from that much of Luther's theology, but Justification has various meanings from proto to western catholic

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm[/url]

I think Justification, or at least the concept it is attempting to explain works fine with a view of theosis. (and sanctification as that audience would use it)

correct me if I am wrong sir.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1476576' date='Mar 12 2008, 09:27 PM']I agree with you on calvinism, and from that much of Luther's theology, but Justification has various meanings from proto to western catholic

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm[/url]

I think Justification, or at least the concept it is attempting to explain works fine with a view of theosis. (and sanctification as that audience would use it)

correct me if I am wrong sir.[/quote]
The Greek patristic tradition holds that man is made [i]righteous[/i], and not simply declared [i]just[/i], by the grace of God. Moreover, there is no theory of "created" grace in the Eastern tradition; and so, the grace of God, which is poured out upon man through the mystery of the incarnation of the eternal Logos, gives man a real participation in God's own righteousness, i.e., in the very righteousness whereby God Himself is righteous.

[Aloysius]

[url="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0801347.htm"]http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0801347.htm[/url]

Vatican spokesman calls rumors of rehabilitation of Luther groundless

By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Rumors that the Vatican is set to rehabilitate Martin Luther, the 16th-century leader of the Protestant Reformation, are groundless, said the Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi.

News reports in early March alleged that Pope Benedict XVI was dedicating a planned September symposium with former doctoral students to re-evaluating Luther, who was excommunicated and condemned for heresy.

The story "does not have any foundation, insofar as no rehabilitation of Luther is foreseen," Father Lombardi told the Italian news agency ANSA March 8.

Vatican officials said the topic of the pope's annual summer gathering of former students this year has not yet been decided. Of the two topics under consideration, Luther is not one of them, one official told Catholic News Service.

Excesses in 16th-century preaching about indulgences and in Catholic penitential practices sparked Luther, a theologian and Augustinian monk, to seek reform in the church. His concerns started a movement that led to the Protestant Reformation.

The church excommunicated Luther for preaching a philosophy doubting the pope's infallibility.

Luther emphasized the absolute primacy of God's action in freeing people from sin and making them just, and the total sufficiency of Christ's death to expiate the sins of all.

In 1983, Pope John Paul II noted that studies by Lutheran and Catholic researchers "have led to a more complete and more differentiated image of the personality of Luther" as well as the complicated historical factors surrounding his life.

Nearly 500 years after the Reformation began in 1517, Lutherans and Catholics resolved one of the issues that began the Reformation era when they signed the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in 1999.

The declaration said the churches' consensus on basic truths means that the doctrine of justification is not a church-dividing issue for Catholics and Lutherans even though differences between them remain in language, theological elaboration and emphasis surrounding those basic truths.

END

what kind of CLOWN COLLEGE is passing for a journalism school nowadays? sheesh. you know that for years to come there will still be people who will say stuff like "didn't the pope say Martin Luther was right a couple years ago?"

[N/A Gone]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1476594' date='Mar 13 2008, 12:13 AM']The Greek patristic tradition holds that man is made [i]righteous[/i], and not simply declared [i]just[/i], by the grace of God. Moreover, there is no theory of "created" grace in the Eastern tradition; and so, the grace of God, which is poured out upon man through the mystery of the incarnation of the eternal Logos, gives man a real participation in God's own righteousness, i.e., in the very righteousness whereby God Himself is righteous.[/quote]

When I was protestant I was taught this. Justification is the initial *boom* and sancitification was the "making righteous" I honestly remember the sanctification aspect better than the Justification (perhaps that is why I like reading what you have on theosis)

I still have no idea what "created grace" is. My understanding of Grace, and its roll in theosis/sanctification is what you describe above.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1476768' date='Mar 13 2008, 10:10 AM']what kind of CLOWN COLLEGE is passing for a journalism school nowadays? sheesh. you know that for years to come there will still be people who will say stuff like "didn't the pope say Martin Luther was right a couple years ago?"[/quote]

The London Times article never said that either. They only said the pope was going to discuss Luther and make a case saying that he wasn't a heretic, but there were no details. So it doesn't even say the pope intends to make any kind of definite statement on the matter. Like I said before, I think the case could be made that Luther wasn't actually teaching heresy at the time he was excommunicated (but then my knowledge of this stuff isn't too thorough), but there is no way that could be said about him at the end of his life.

So, yeah, nothing much significant, but the newspapers gotta sell papers, whether there is news or not.

[Apotheoun]

Luther's views on salvation and the nature of man are clearly heretical.

That said, God only knows whether he intended to teach heresy or not.

[N/A Gone]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1476814' date='Mar 13 2008, 12:39 PM']When I was protestant I was taught this. Justification is the initial *boom* and sancitification was the "making righteous" I honestly remember the sanctification aspect better than the Justification (perhaps that is why I like reading what you have on theosis)

I still have no idea what "created grace" is. My understanding of Grace, and its roll in theosis/sanctification is what you describe above.[/quote]

What did you think about this Mr. Kaster?

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1477370' date='Mar 14 2008, 03:46 PM']Luther's views on salvation and the nature of man are clearly heretical.

That said, God only knows whether he intended to teach heresy or not.[/quote]

Yes, I fully agree.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1474944' date='Mar 10 2008, 12:33 PM']Here is a transcript of a conversation I had with a professor back when I was a total n00b.

Me: That sounds pretty close to the views of the heretic Martin Luther.
Prof: <dumbfounded> ... <dramatic pause with blank stare> ...
Me: You don't agree?
Prof: Martin Luther was a great reformer!!
Me: ... Ok, so I guess I didn't get an A on that paper.

What should have happened:

Me: That sounds pretty close to the views of the heretic Martin Luther.
Prof: <dumbfounded> ... <dramatic pause with blank stare> ...
Me: You don't agree?
Prof: Martin Luther was a great reformer!!
Me: Martin Luther was an excommunicant!!
Prof: Why, *gaf* how dare you..
Me: No sir! How dare you!!
Prof: Get out of my office!
Me: With pleasure you unfortunate scalawag! And may God have mercy on your soul.[/quote]
Wow, you've gained a lot of chutzpa over the years...

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1475008' date='Mar 10 2008, 03:00 PM']I assume there is a great story behind that.[/quote]

Indeed. One I'd love to hear.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1474286' date='Mar 8 2008, 04:27 PM']And Goldenchild, don't be a chump.[/quote]

I think you mistake me for chuck norris

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1474679' date='Mar 9 2008, 07:36 PM']I did enough of that when I was a Protestant.[/quote]

burn

[Alycin]

[Jnorm888]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1474706' date='Mar 9 2008, 08:26 PM']In my opinion Luther was a theological nominalist.[/quote]

What's that?




JNORM888