Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Meat On Lenten Fridays: A Mortal Sin?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Doug View Post

    So eating 19 pieces of fish instead of the normal 20 pieces of fish in one sitting can qualify as that person fasting since it is a smaller meal than usual?
    Like I said there is no church legislation on the quantity of food, that is between you and god alone.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by utilyan View Post

      Luther wrote down his theology and it includes murdering Jews. You can have hundreds of popes even one today say they hate jews, That does not change Catholic theology.

      IN TEACHING Luther says kill Jews. He wrote an entire book on it. He determines his own theology.


      The Lutherans know. ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin...d_antisemitism

      The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, in an essay on Lutheran-Jewish relations, observed that "Over the years, Luther's anti-Jewish writings have continued to be reproduced in pamphlets and other works by neo-Nazi and antisemitic groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan."[95]

      Nothing in Catholic church teaching says hate anyone. Evil Catholics exist. The teaching however does not teach to hate Jews.


      Luther however is writing a book teaching to HATE JEWS -->The Nazis used Martin Luther's book, On the Jews and Their Lies (1543), to claim a moral righteousness for their ideology. Luther even went so far as to advocate the murder of those Jews who refused to convert to Christianity, writing that "we are at fault in not slaying them".[55]

      If a catholic wrote a book it only is what it is that does not determine church teaching. Thats why we are not caught by inventions of false teaching as Luther caught plenty with his theology of Faith Alone.
      Theology is the study of God.
      If you can find the advocating of killing people in Luther's Theology then you must share.
      Here's the Lutherans complete confession of faith. Book of Concord

      Martin Luther personally thought his work entitled The Bondage of the Will surpassed everything he ever penned. That aside theologians also believe both the Large & Small Catechisms along with his Second Commentary on Galatians rank pretty high as well.

      ​​On the other hand, Roman Catholics teach and confess (apparently) that it accords with the holy spirit to burn people at the stake.

      Nic
      Last edited by Nic; 03-09-19, 01:10 AM.
      1Co 1:30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption,
      1Co 1:31 so that, as it is written, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord."

      Comment


      • Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        Luther wrote down his theology and it includes murdering Jews.
        This is false. Luther did not instruct anyone to murder Jews. Even in his harsh book, "On The Jews and Their Lies," Luther says, not to "harm their persons." See LW 47:274.

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        You can have hundreds of popes even one today say they hate jews, That does not change Catholic theology.
        The Pope officially released "Decet Romanum" in 1521. The papacy said of the Lutherans: their property is to be confiscated, those adhering to "Lutheranism" are to be treated as criminals against the Empire. They were considered "excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them. They are to be strictly shunned by all faithful Christians." Had you lived in 1521, this is what the Papacy would have instructed faithful Roman Catholics to believe. That was official Roman Catholic teaching in 1521.

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        IN TEACHING Luther says kill Jews. He wrote an entire book on it. He determines his own theology.
        Once again, this is false. Luther never said to "kill Jews."

        True, Luther wrote against the Jews, but do you want to know Luther's opinion of his books? "I would have been quite content to see my books, one and all, remain in obscurity and go by the board.... My consolation is that, in time, my books will lie forgotten in the dust anyhow, especially if I (by God’s grace) have written anything good." (LW 34:283-284). If you want to know what the essence of Luther's "teaching" is, simply go get a copy of the Book of Concord. This is the confessional standard that embraced Luther's teaching, and carried it on to subsequent generations.

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        I'm not a millennial, so I don't rely on Wikipedia (even though that Wiki article refers to me at the bottom, LOL).

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, in an essay on Lutheran-Jewish relations, observed that "Over the years, Luther's anti-Jewish writings have continued to be reproduced in pamphlets and other works by neo-Nazi and antisemitic groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan."[95]
        This is an invalid argument, but please, do provide some examples of this. You brought it up, so prove it.

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        Nothing in Catholic church teaching says hate anyone. Evil Catholics exist. The teaching however does not teach to hate Jews.
        Except of course in 1521, when all the faithful Roman Catholics were instructed via an official bull from the Pope instructing them to, in essence, hate Lutherans.

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        Luther however is writing a book teaching to HATE JEWS -->
        The Pope in 1521, instructed Roman Catholics to hate Lutherans,

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        The Nazis used Martin Luther's book, On the Jews and Their Lies (1543), to claim a moral righteousness for their ideology.
        The Nazis picked and chose what they wanted from Luther. But by all means, instruct me here. Where exactly, or what is your proof, that the Nazis used Luther's treatise, "to claim a moral righteousness for their ideology"?

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        Luther even went so far as to advocate the murder of those Jews who refused to convert to Christianity, writing that "we are at fault in not slaying them".[55]
        This is false. Luther never advocated murdering anyone who didn't convert. The quote you've cut-and-pasted "we are at fault for not slaying them" is being taken out of context, and I can prove it if need be.

        Originally posted by utilyan View Post
        If a catholic wrote a book it only is what it is that does not determine church teaching. Thats why we are not caught by inventions of false teaching as Luther caught plenty with his theology of Faith Alone.
        In 1521 the Pope releases a official document instructing Roman Catholics to hate Lutherans. If you lived in 1521, this was the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.

        Last edited by James Swan; 03-09-19, 02:00 AM.

        Comment


        • [Originally posted by James Swan;n5861563

          I'm not a millennial, so I don't rely on Wikipedia (even though that Wiki article refers to me at the bottom, LOL).
          Hi James, That's too funny!!!
          You are apparently a potential contributing source against you.
          Is that a first?

          Nic
          Last edited by Nic; 03-09-19, 02:10 AM.
          1Co 1:30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption,
          1Co 1:31 so that, as it is written, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord."

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Nic View Post
            Theology is the study of God.
            If you can find the advocating of killing people in Luther's Theology then you must share.
            Here's the Lutherans complete confession of faith. Book of Concord

            Martin Luther personally thought his work entitled The Bondage of the Will surpassed everything he ever penned. That aside theologians also believe both the Large & Small Catechisms along with his Second Commentary on Galatians rank pretty high as well.

            ​​On the other hand, Roman Catholics teach and confess (apparently) that it accords with the holy spirit to burn people at the stake.

            Nic
            "If you can find the advocating of killing people in Luther's Theology then you must share."

            Nic this is the BOOK! ---->the Jews and Their Lies (German: Von den Jüden und iren Lügen; in modern spelling Von den Juden und ihren Lügen) is a 65,000-word antisemitic treatise written in 1543 by the German Reformation leader Martin Luther.On


            According to MARTIN LUTHER you are a sinner if you let Jews Live. I'm not making this up.


            "Roman Catholics teach and confess (apparently) that it accords with the holy spirit to burn people at the stake."

            Source.

            My theology does not lie in someone else's book. But if I wrote a book OBVIOUSLY there it is.

            Pope BINGO the 3rd, Could write a book on the best way to toast a heretic. That does not change catholic teaching nor theology, It may however expose POPE Bingo's theology.

            Martin LUTHER wrote KILL JEWS as a teaching.

            That is plainly his theology so much so he wrote a book for it! He said he liked bondage of the will 1537. He wrote ON JEWS AND THEIR LIES on 1543.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by James Swan View Post

              This is false. Luther did not instruct anyone to murder Jews. Even in his harsh book, "On The Jews and Their Lies," Luther says, not to "harm their persons." See LW 47:274.



              The Pope officially released "Decet Romanum" in 1521. The papacy said of the Lutherans: their property is to be confiscated, those adhering to "Lutheranism" are to be treated as criminals against the Empire. They were considered "excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them. They are to be strictly shunned by all faithful Christians." Had you lived in 1521, this is what the Papacy would have instructed faithful Roman Catholics to believe. That was official Roman Catholic teaching in 1521.



              Once again, this is false. Luther never said to "kill Jews."

              True, Luther wrote against the Jews, but do you want to know Luther's opinion of his books? "I would have been quite content to see my books, one and all, remain in obscurity and go by the board.... My consolation is that, in time, my books will lie forgotten in the dust anyhow, especially if I (by God’s grace) have written anything good." (LW 34:283-284). If you want to know what the essence of Luther's "teaching" is, simply go get a copy of the Book of Concord. This is the confessional standard that embraced Luther's teaching, and carried it on to subsequent generations.



              I'm not a millennial, so I don't rely on Wikipedia (even though that Wiki article refers to me at the bottom, LOL).



              This is an invalid argument, but please, do provide some examples of this. You brought it up, so prove it.



              Except of course in 1521, when all the faithful Roman Catholics were instructed via an official bull from the Pope instructing them to, in essence, hate Lutherans.



              The Pope in 1521, instructed Roman Catholics to hate Lutherans,



              The Nazis picked and chose what they wanted from Luther. But by all means, instruct me here. Where exactly, or what is your proof, that the Nazis used Luther's treatise, "to claim a moral righteousness for their ideology"?



              This is false. Luther never advocated murdering anyone who didn't convert. The quote you've cut-and-pasted "we are at fault for not slaying them" is being taken out of context, and I can prove it if need be.



              In 1521 the Pope releases a official document instructing Roman Catholics to hate Lutherans. If you lived in 1521, this was the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.
              "We are at fault in not slaying them" --Martin Luther.



              There is no other explanation for this than the one cited earlier from Moses, namely, that God has struck them with "madness and blindness and confusion of mind." So we are even at fault in not avenging all this innocent blood of our Lord and of the Christians which they shed for three hundred years after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the blood of the children they have shed since then (which still shines forth from their eyes and their skin). We are at fault in not slaying them. Rather we allow them to live freely in our midst despite an their murdering, cursing, blaspheming, lying, and defaming; we protect and shield their synagogues, houses, life, and property In this way we make them lazy and secure and encourage them to fleece us boldly of our money and goods, as well as to mock and deride us, with a view to finally overcoming us, killing us all for such a great sin, and robbing us of all our property (as they daily pray and hope). Now tell me whether they do not have every reason to be the enemies of us accursed Goyim, to curse us and to strive for our final, complete, and eternal ruin! --Martin Luther ON JEWS AND THEIR LIES.



              Furthermore, if they are pious Jews and not the whoring people, as the prophets call them, how does it happen that their piety is so concealed that God himself is not aware of it, and they are not aware of it either? For they have, as we said, prayed, cried, and suffered almost fifteen hundred years already, and yet God refuses to listen to them. We know from Scripture that God will hear the prayers or sighing of the righteous, as the Psalter says [Ps. 145:19]: "He fulfills the desire of all who fear him, he also hears their cry." And Psalm 34:17: "When the righteous cry for help, the Lord hears." As he promised in Psalm 50:15: "Call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you." The same is found in many more verses of the Scripture. If it were not for these, who would or could pray? In brief, he says in the first commandment that he will be their God. Then, how do you explain that he will not listen to these Jews? They must assuredly be the base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth. If there were a single pious Jew among them who observed these, he would have to be heard; for God cannot let his saints pray in vain, as Scripture demonstrates by many examples. This is conclusive evidence that they cannot be pious Jews, but must be the multitude of the whoring and murderous people. --- Martin Luther ON JEWS and THEIR LIES.




              Pope Bacon can declare we should hate and kill everyone in the world. That does not equate to Catholic Theology. That is HIS theology.


              We can read Decet Romanum Pontificem

              Papal Bull of Excommunication of Martin Luther and his followers

              http://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10decet.htm



              QUOTE IT. There is nothing in an excommunication that teaches brand new theology. Quote where it says Catholic teaching is now hate Lutherans.



              Its amazing how out of the way folks will go to defend a Nazi teaching.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                "We are at fault in not slaying them" --Martin Luther.
                The actual place where these words from Luther occur is LW 47:267. Luther in context is bombastically arguing against the oppression of the Jews, saying rather that the Jews are oppressing the Germans! He presents the argument that it is they that are benefiting off German land, at the expense of the Germans. He further takes as true the the rumors that the Jews were killing German children and poisoning wells. "We are at fault in not slaying them" is part of a rhetorical argument in which Luther accepts the negative Jewish stereotypes of his day, then he attempts to present the case that despite these Jewish crimes, the Germans were gracious and kind to the Jews. Luther is not saying that the Germans should go out and kill the Jews. He's saying that if all the negative things are true about the Jews are true (as he previously stated, like killing children, poisoning wells, etc.), the Germans were at moral fault for allowing them to live. Rather, Germany has allowed them "to live freely in our midst despite all their murdering, cursing, blaspheming, lying, and defaming; we protect and shield their synagogues, houses, life, and property. In this way we make them lazy and secure and encourage them to fleece us boldly of our money and goods, as well as to mock and deride us, with a view to finally overcoming us, killing us all for such a great sin, and robbing us of all our property..." This is a rhetorical descriptive argument. It is not a prescription to go out and kill Jews. .

                Luther goes on to say a few pages later... not to "harm their persons":
                And you, my dear gentlemen and friends who are pastors and preachers, I wish to remind very faithfully of your official duty, so that you too may warn your parishioners concerning their eternal harm, as you know how to do—namely, that they be on their guard against the Jews and avoid them so far as possible. They should not curse them or harm their persons, however. For the Jews have cursed and harmed themselves more than enough by cursing the Man Jesus of Nazareth, Mary’s son, which they unfortunately have been doing for over fourteen hundred years. Let the government deal with them in this respect, as I have suggested. But whether the government acts or not, let everyone at least be guided by his own conscience and form for himself a definition or image of a Jew. (LW 47:274)
                Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                Pope Bacon can declare we should hate and kill everyone in the world. That does not equate to Catholic Theology. That is HIS theology.
                In 1521, Decet Romanum pontificem officially instructed Roman Catholics how to treat Lutherans. If you were alive in 1521, this would have been the declarations guiding the society you lived in. Would you REALLY have said, "I'm not going to follow your directive, Pope Bacon. It is not Roman theology?" How would you know it was not Roman theology?

                Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                We can read Decet Romanum Pontificem

                Papal Bull of Excommunication of Martin Luther and his followers

                http://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10decet.htm QUOTE IT. There is nothing in an excommunication that teaches brand new theology. Quote where it says Catholic teaching is now hate Lutherans.
                It has been quoted to you. It was cited with the specific purpose of demonstrating your double standard. You cited Luther's calling for harsh treatment of the Jews, and I countered with Rome demanding harsh treatment of the Lutherans. You can't have it both ways: you can't accuse Luther of being a "Nazi" for what he wrote (see your post here) and then ignore that the Papacy called for the same sort of treatment of the Lutherans: Property is to be confiscated, those adhering to "Lutheranism" are to be treated as criminals against the Empire. They were considered "excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them. They are to be strictly shunned by all faithful Christians.

                Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                Its amazing how out of the way folks will go to defend a Nazi teaching.
                This is pure personal slander, but it does serve its purpose in demonstrating your double standard at best, and at worst indicates you have missed the thrust of the argument. Nowhere in this vast thing we call "cyberspace" will you find me "defending Nazi teaching." Rather, I've been critical of Luther's anti-Jewish comments for years.

                Certainly Luther's comments about the Jews were terrible, but they are not the deciding factor in his theology. Good Roman Catholic scholarship typically interacts with Luther's theology rather than attacking Luther the person, because the story of Luther's negativity towards the Jews is really to tell the story of medieval Christianity and medieval society's negativity towards the Jews.

                Previous to Luther there were atrocities like The Strasbourg massacre (1349). Those Jews agreeing to be baptized were spared being burned alive. Even after Luther, Pope Paul IV (1555-1559) was involved in some fairly serious Jewish persecution:

                “In 1553 all copies of the Talmud found in Rome were burned in public. Pope Paul IV (1555-1559) ordered measures to be taken against the Jews, and twenty-four men and one woman were burned at the stake. On July 12, 1555, he issued a bull that renewed all the oppressive medieval legislation against the Jews, excluding them from professions, limiting their financial and commercial activities, forbidding them to own real estate, and humiliating them by obliging them to wear yellow hats" [Lewis W. Spitz, The Protestant Reformation (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1985), 357].

                Owen Chadwick likewise documents this: “He forced every Jew to wear a yellow hat and live in a ghetto with only one exit… He caused to be published the first Index of prohibited books… Sixtus of Siena was sent to Cremona, where there was a great Hebrew school (for the destruction of the Talmud was ordered), and reported that he had burnt a store of 12,000 volumes…. Under an Inquisition with extended powers, and a pope ready to suspect everyone, there was almost a reign of terror in the city. ‘Even if my own father were a heretic,’ said the Pope, ‘I would gather the wood to burn him’” [Owen Chadwick, The Reformation (New York: Penguin Books, 1964), 271].

                A cyber-acquaintance of mine stated something in passing on Luther's attitude toward the Jews that I find meaningful, not only to the Luther & the Jews dispute, but to many aspects of church history:

                "Let's think about this: 500 years ago, someone demonstrates that his view of people different than himself sociologically or politically is pretty provincial and, if we can say it plainly, insulting. In every generation after him, because of his influence in general, every biographer of him points out the fault, decries it, and indicates we shouldn't be like him. All the people who follow this guy theologically and denominationally all repudiate his faulty views, and they confessionally reject these views. His 500 years of influence are thereafter gleaned for the best of his ideas and the worst are literally called out and rejected, and reasonably-healthy churches are thereafter grown."
                Even though I'm not a Lutheran, I think this is the actual paradigm Lutheranism has followed. From my perspective, I use the same paradigm for church history, be it Chrysostom, Origen, Augustine, etc. I realize that the voices from the past often have sins and faults. The cliche is to chew the meat and spit out the bones. That's what I do with Luther- that's why I can read him, even while not being a Lutheran, and I can appreciate him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                  "We are at fault in not slaying them" --Martin Luther.
                  Luther in context is bombastically arguing against the oppression of the Jews, saying rather that the Jews are oppressing the Germans! He presents the argument that it is they that are benefiting off German land, at the expense of the Germans. He further takes as true the the rumors that the Jews were killing German children and poisoning wells. "We are at fault in not slaying them" is part of a rhetorical argument in which Luther accepts the negative Jewish stereotypes of his day, then he attempts to present the case that despite these Jewish crimes, the Germans were gracious and kind to the Jews.

                  Luther is not saying that the Germans should go out and kill the Jews. He's saying that if all the negative things are true about the Jews are true (as he previously stated, like killing children, poisoning wells, etc.), the Germans were at moral fault for allowing them to live. Rather, Germany has allowed them "to live freely in our midst despite all their murdering, cursing, blaspheming, lying, and defaming; we protect and shield their synagogues, houses, life, and property. In this way we make them lazy and secure and encourage them to fleece us boldly of our money and goods, as well as to mock and deride us, with a view to finally overcoming us, killing us all for such a great sin, and robbing us of all our property..." This is a rhetorical descriptive argument. It is not a prescription to go out and kill Jews.

                  Luther goes on to say a few pages later... not to "harm their persons":
                  "And you, my dear gentlemen and friends who are pastors and preachers, I wish to remind very faithfully of your official duty, so that you too may warn your parishioners concerning their eternal harm, as you know how to do-namely, that they be on their guard against the Jews and avoid them so far as possible. They should not curse them or harm their persons, however. For the Jews have cursed and harmed themselves more than enough by cursing the Man Jesus of Nazareth, Mary's son, which they unfortunately have been doing for over fourteen hundred years. Let the government deal with them in this respect, as I have suggested. But whether the government acts or not, let everyone at least be guided by his own conscience and form for himself a definition or image of a Jew." (LW 47:274)
                  Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                  Pope Bacon can declare we should hate and kill everyone in the world. That does not equate to Catholic Theology. That is HIS theology.
                  In 1521, adherents of Roman Catholicism were instructed by the Papacy through an official Roman Catholic document to seize the property of Lutherans and to treat Lutherans as criminals against the empire. Lutherans were to be considered "excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them." They were to be strictly shunned and treated as societal pariah. If you lived in 1521, how would you know this was not official church teaching? Why would you be allowed to pick and choose what to believe?


                  Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                  We can read Decet Romanum Pontificem Papal Bull of Excommunication of Martin Luther and his followers. QUOTE IT. There is nothing in an excommunication that teaches brand new theology. Quote where it says Catholic teaching is now hate Lutherans.
                  It has been quoted to you in post #71 in this thread.The papal statement has some of the same features Luther's comments against the Jews have. Property is to be confiscated, those adhering to "Lutheranism" are to be treated as criminals against the Empire. They were considered "excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them. They are to be strictly shunned by all faithful Christians."

                  Originally posted by utilyan View Post
                  Its amazing how out of the way folks will go to defend a Nazi teaching.
                  Referring to anything I've written as defending "Nazi teaching" is slander, but it does serve its purpose in demonstrating the double standard going on in your argumentation: Rome can put forth the same sort of hatred Luther did, but you're willing to give it a free pass,

                  Certainly Luther's comments about the Jews were terrible. The story of Luther's negativity towards the Jews is really to tell the story of medieval Christianity and medieval society's negativity towards the Jews, including Rome herself.

                  Previous to Luther there were atrocities like The Strasbourg massacre (1349). Those Jews agreeing to be baptized were spared being burned alive. Even after Luther, Pope Paul IV (1555-1559) was involved in some fairly serious Jewish persecution:

                  "In 1553 all copies of the Talmud found in Rome were burned in public. Pope Paul IV (1555-1559) ordered measures to be taken against the Jews, and twenty-four men and one woman were burned at the stake. On July 12, 1555, he issued a bull that renewed all the oppressive medieval legislation against the Jews, excluding them from professions, limiting their financial and commercial activities, forbidding them to own real estate, and humiliating them by obliging them to wear yellow hats" [Lewis W. Spitz, The Protestant Reformation (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1985), 357].

                  Owen Chadwick likewise documents this: "He forced every Jew to wear a yellow hat and live in a ghetto with only one exit... He caused to be published the first Index of prohibited books... Sixtus of Siena was sent to Cremona, where there was a great Hebrew school (for the destruction of the Talmud was ordered), and reported that he had burnt a store of 12,000 volumes.... Under an Inquisition with extended powers, and a pope ready to suspect everyone, there was almost a reign of terror in the city. 'Even if my own father were a heretic,' said the Pope, 'I would gather the wood to burn him'" [Owen Chadwick, The Reformation (New York: Penguin Books, 1964), 271].

                  I have friends who argue against Roman Catholicism because of the crusades, pedophilia, a nun hitting someone in grammar school, or any number of sins committed by people who adhere to Roman Catholicism. This is one of the worst ways to argue. In the same way, those Roman Catholics who argue against Protestantism attempting to vilify Luther have no way to consistently argue for their position positively. That is, if the hierarchy of the Roman church has done something wrong or sinful at any point in her past, then by their standard applied to Luther, the Roman church is invalid... It works both ways.
                  Last edited by James Swan; 03-09-19, 12:23 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by James Swan View Post

                    Luther in context is bombastically arguing against the oppression of the Jews, saying rather that the Jews are oppressing the Germans! He presents the argument that it is they that are benefiting off German land, at the expense of the Germans. He further takes as true the the rumors that the Jews were killing German children and poisoning wells. "We are at fault in not slaying them" is part of a rhetorical argument in which Luther accepts the negative Jewish stereotypes of his day, then he attempts to present the case that despite these Jewish crimes, the Germans were gracious and kind to the Jews.

                    Luther is not saying that the Germans should go out and kill the Jews. He's saying that if all the negative things are true about the Jews are true (as he previously stated, like killing children, poisoning wells, etc.), the Germans were at moral fault for allowing them to live. Rather, Germany has allowed them "to live freely in our midst despite all their murdering, cursing, blaspheming, lying, and defaming; we protect and shield their synagogues, houses, life, and property. In this way we make them lazy and secure and encourage them to fleece us boldly of our money and goods, as well as to mock and deride us, with a view to finally overcoming us, killing us all for such a great sin, and robbing us of all our property..." This is a rhetorical descriptive argument. It is not a prescription to go out and kill Jews.

                    Luther goes on to say a few pages later... not to "harm their persons":
                    "And you, my dear gentlemen and friends who are pastors and preachers, I wish to remind very faithfully of your official duty, so that you too may warn your parishioners concerning their eternal harm, as you know how to do-namely, that they be on their guard against the Jews and avoid them so far as possible. They should not curse them or harm their persons, however. For the Jews have cursed and harmed themselves more than enough by cursing the Man Jesus of Nazareth, Mary's son, which they unfortunately have been doing for over fourteen hundred years. Let the government deal with them in this respect, as I have suggested. But whether the government acts or not, let everyone at least be guided by his own conscience and form for himself a definition or image of a Jew." (LW 47:274)
                    In 1521, adherents of Roman Catholicism were instructed by the Papacy through an official Roman Catholic document to seize the property of Lutherans and to treat Lutherans as criminals against the empire. Lutherans were to be considered "excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them." They were to be strictly shunned and treated as societal pariah. If you lived in 1521, how would you know this was not official church teaching? Why would you be allowed to pick and choose what to believe?




                    It has been quoted to you in post #71 in this thread.The papal statement has some of the same features Luther's comments against the Jews have. Property is to be confiscated, those adhering to "Lutheranism" are to be treated as criminals against the Empire. They were considered "excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them. They are to be strictly shunned by all faithful Christians."



                    Referring to anything I've written as defending "Nazi teaching" is slander, but it does serve its purpose in demonstrating the double standard going on in your argumentation: Rome can put forth the same sort of hatred Luther did, but you're willing to give it a free pass,

                    Certainly Luther's comments about the Jews were terrible. The story of Luther's negativity towards the Jews is really to tell the story of medieval Christianity and medieval society's negativity towards the Jews, including Rome herself.

                    Previous to Luther there were atrocities like The Strasbourg massacre (1349). Those Jews agreeing to be baptized were spared being burned alive. Even after Luther, Pope Paul IV (1555-1559) was involved in some fairly serious Jewish persecution:

                    "In 1553 all copies of the Talmud found in Rome were burned in public. Pope Paul IV (1555-1559) ordered measures to be taken against the Jews, and twenty-four men and one woman were burned at the stake. On July 12, 1555, he issued a bull that renewed all the oppressive medieval legislation against the Jews, excluding them from professions, limiting their financial and commercial activities, forbidding them to own real estate, and humiliating them by obliging them to wear yellow hats" [Lewis W. Spitz, The Protestant Reformation (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1985), 357].

                    Owen Chadwick likewise documents this: "He forced every Jew to wear a yellow hat and live in a ghetto with only one exit... He caused to be published the first Index of prohibited books... Sixtus of Siena was sent to Cremona, where there was a great Hebrew school (for the destruction of the Talmud was ordered), and reported that he had burnt a store of 12,000 volumes.... Under an Inquisition with extended powers, and a pope ready to suspect everyone, there was almost a reign of terror in the city. 'Even if my own father were a heretic,' said the Pope, 'I would gather the wood to burn him'" [Owen Chadwick, The Reformation (New York: Penguin Books, 1964), 271].

                    I have friends who argue against Roman Catholicism because of the crusades, pedophilia, a nun hitting someone in grammar school, or any number of sins committed by people who adhere to Roman Catholicism. This is one of the worst ways to argue. In the same way, those Roman Catholics who argue against Protestantism attempting to vilify Luther have no way to consistently argue for their position positively. That is, if the hierarchy of the Roman church has done something wrong or sinful at any point in her past, then by their standard applied to Luther, the Roman church is invalid... It works both ways.

                    Simply James you are absolutely correct in how you have misunderstood it. Neo-Donatism doesn't work and hypocrites are wrong. I 100% agree.

                    If you could split the hairs between Lutheran and Luther's theology, you could better understand my POV.

                    LUTHER's theology is flat out wrong.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by utilyan View Post


                      Simply James you are absolutely correct in how you have misunderstood it. Neo-Donatism doesn't work and hypocrites are wrong. I 100% agree.

                      If you could split the hairs between Lutheran and Luther's theology, you could better understand my POV.

                      LUTHER's theology is flat out wrong.
                      https://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-...der_089870202X
                      page 290 by Peter Kreeft
                      quoting
                      "How do I resolve the Reformation?
                      Is it faith alone that justifies, or is it faith and works?
                      Very simple.
                      No tricks.
                      On this issue I believe Luther was simply right;
                      and this issue is absolutely crucial.

                      As a Catholic I feel guilt for the tragedy of Christian disunity because the church in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was failing to preach the gospel.
                      Whatever theological mistakes Luther made, whatever indispensable truths about the Church he denied, here is an indispensable truth he affirmed — indispensable to union between all sinners and God and union between God’s separated Catholic and Protestant children."
                      end quote


                      and Pope Francis knows it:
                      http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/...was-right.html
                      "Luther Was Right"

                      Pope Francis says he agrees with Martin Luther about justification
                      http://www.dennyburk.com/pope-franci...justification/
                      "I think that the intentions of Martin Luther were not mistaken. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not correct. But in that time, if we read the story of the Pastor, a German Lutheran who then converted when he saw reality – he became Catholic – in that time, the Church was not exactly a model to imitate. There was corruption in the Church, there was worldliness, attachment to money, to power…and this he protested. Then he was intelligent and took some steps forward justifying, and because he did this. And today Lutherans and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err. He made a medicine for the Church…"
                      -Pope Francis

                      Wow! Luther was right
                      Luther did not err
                      One of the ekklēsia

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by utilyan View Post


                        Simply James you are absolutely correct in how you have misunderstood it. Neo-Donatism doesn't work and hypocrites are wrong. I 100% agree.

                        If you could split the hairs between Lutheran and Luther's theology, you could better understand my POV.

                        LUTHER's theology is flat out wrong.
                        Wow. Tilt. Game completely over.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Kat4life View Post

                          How does fasting or abstinence take one away from God? Fasting is biblical.

                          A great many Catholics went to their parish today where they heard scripture read, prayed together as a church family, raised their voices in song to God and received the Eucharist.
                          I'm talking about rituals set up by mere men whom claim if you do this or don't do that then it's a sin.
                          As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, For the wages of sin is death, Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned-- But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." (Romans 3:10; 3:23; 6:23a; 5:12; 5:8; 10:13 NIV)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by utilyan View Post

                            You will never know the savory delight of a Forbidden Bacon-Cheese burger that is guaranteed to send you to hell if you nibble on it. Some things are just better when forbidden.
                            LOL So true!
                            As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, For the wages of sin is death, Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned-- But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." (Romans 3:10; 3:23; 6:23a; 5:12; 5:8; 10:13 NIV)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by James Swan View Post

                              Wow. Tilt. Game completely over.
                              LoL, TiLT, Game Over, LoL.
                              I haven't heard that one in a while. Very funny, thank you!
                              Nic
                              1Co 1:30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption,
                              1Co 1:31 so that, as it is written, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord."

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by tester View Post
                                Let see if this is the year when Catholics agree on the answer:
                                Meat On Lenten Fridays: A Mortal Sin?

                                A common question at this time of year is whether or not deliberately violating the law of abstinence is a mortal sin.

                                as serious as mortal sins are: is there a unified response from Carm- posting Catholics?

                                If a Roman Catholic goes to a Baptist run fish fry during Lent , is it a sin? I guess the fact that the adjacent Roman Catholic church has been boarded up and closed left the market wide open. But is this permissible for Roman Catholics to attend.


                                https://www.nb-bc.org/page.php?id=4

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X