I came across this recent post over at Catholic Answers:
What are the contexts and primary sources of the infamous Luther quotes?
We've probably just about all seen some of the infamous Martin Luther quotes flying around the Internet. "Sin boldly," "Christ committed adultery," etc. I'd like to ask the Protestants, Catholics and anyone else here with information on this for the ORIGINAL documents the infamous quotes come from. If anyone here also has the contexts of some of them, the paragraphs preceeding and following these quotes, would you mind copying them down here? I want to know what to make of these various statements by Luther, and I can't do that without their original contexts and citations from the primary documents so I can check them up. If anyone has information on this, I'd greatly appreciate hearing from you. Thanks a lot!
I've posted this, because it's such a rare occurrence to see such a question or interest posted by a Roman Catholic, and I have to give this person the "two thumbs up" for such an endeavour. With the Internet now, a large portion of primary materials can be located, so hopefully the days of "The Facts About Luther" are over.
The post went on to suggest this blog as a place to find such materials. In regard to "sin boldy," information on this can be found here. Information on "Christ committed adultery" can be found here.
James,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the "two thumbs up" for this Catholic. It's nice when people are amicable with the other side, so to speak.
I was trying to browse your site for any postings in response to Belloc's assertion that the Reformation was the first step in the direction of self-reliance. He said the next step was rejecting the Bible as an authority and creating a "subjective religion", which I have seen done. Your site is quite extensive, and I couldn't find what I was looking for. Can you direct me?
Thank you.
Greetings.
ReplyDeleteThis is actually an off topic request: i wonder if you could recommend to me some of what you consider the best articles (or multimedia) answering the romanists claim that they gave us the Bible.
If you could send the links to maxaug@gmail.com it would be great.
God bless you all and keep up the good work!
Stacey,
ReplyDeleteHere is one good place to start.
The Roman Catholic Church makes lots of assertions along those lines, and those posts go a long way toward discrediting their claims to superiority on that count.
I was trying to browse your site for any postings in response to Belloc's assertion that the Reformation was the first step in the direction of self-reliance. He said the next step was rejecting the Bible as an authority and creating a "subjective religion", which I have seen done.
ReplyDeleteI'd have to see Belloc's argument to fully understand what is meant by "self-reliance"- I don't recall writing on it, and I haven't read Belloc in quite some time.
On the other hand, any Catholic putting forth argumentation using "subjective" and "objective" is usually employing double standards- that is, putting forth a position that is refuted by their own argumentation. Rome's apologists typically offer goods that don't provide what they claim they do.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRhology,
ReplyDeleteThanks! That's a lot of reading...
James,
I know you're probably a busy man, but if you're interested in looking it up, I was reading this essay in "Survivals and New Arrivals".
if you're interested in looking it up, I was reading this essay in "Survivals and New Arrivals".
ReplyDeleteHi Stacey,
I will put it on my "to do list." I have a big paper I'm working on at the moment for a WTS class.
I do find the subjective/objective comments from RC writers rather amusing. Here's a church claiming to infallbily interpret Scripture which never (or rarely) does, and as I blogged recently over at aomin, even infallible statments are allowed to have multiple interpretations as long as they don't deny the infallible interpretation- but then again, those infallible statements are....interpreted privately by subjective individuals.
James writes, "Here's a church claiming to infallbily interpret Scripture which never (or rarely) does . . ."
ReplyDeleteWhat is amusing about this? The Church claims the authority to infallibly interpret the scriptures. What does the frequency of its exercise of that authority have to do with anything?
". . . even infallible statments are allowed to have multiple interpretations as long as they don't deny the infallible interpretation . . ."
And? What's the point?
". . . but then again, those infallible statements are....interpreted privately by subjective individuals."
Yes, and private individual Protestants interpret the Bible in any number of subjective ways. Does that affect the objective authority and accuracy of the Bible?
I realize your point is that Catholics argue that sola scriptura doesn't work because people will interpret the Bible in any number of subjective ways; and you're saying some Catholics do the same with infallible pronouncements. The difference, however, is that the Church claims to be a living authority capable of continually clarifying the meaning and intention of its own statements, which no book can do. Thus using our own argument against us in this case doesn't work.
Stacey writes, "It's nice when people are amicable with the other side, so to speak."
ReplyDeleteYeah, it was nice of him to point out when a Catholic does something good. But . . . maybe . . . not quite so nice to purport that Catholics hardly ever do such a thing.
Agellius,
ReplyDeletePositive reinforcement. Try not to be upset and just offer it up to the Lord. Prove him wrong with your actions.
Peace.
the Church claims to be a living authority capable of continually clarifying the meaning and intention of its own statements, which no book can do.
ReplyDelete1) Yes, the church CLAIMS to be that, but the verification of those claims are circular.
2) The upshot of this living authority, according to your own statement, would be that the church could thus actually clarify stuff sometimes. Please name the last time it has infallibly done so.
Stacey writes, "Try not to be upset and just offer it up to the Lord. Prove him wrong with your actions."
ReplyDeleteI'm not upset and I have nothing to prove. But thanks for offering your advice.
Rhology:
ReplyDeleteSince we are getting off the topic of the thread, I will respond to your comment via e-mail.