Posted by Mark Shea on Friday, Nov 2, 2012 5:18 PM (EST):
Luther, by the way, believed in the Immaculate Conception.
“It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” - Martin Luther’s Sermon “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527.
“She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin—something exceedingly great. For God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. - Martin Luther’s Little Prayer Book, 1522.
Instead of ignorantly and reflexively regurgitating whatever an American Evangelical might say after 20 minutes of glancing at the New Testament, consider the possibility that the Church doesn’t just make stuff up and actually has real grounds for considering this to be apostolic teaching.
And while we're on the topic of Luther's Mariology, back in 2007 you put out this blunder about Luther's tomb supporting Mariology. I suggest sticking to defending your Romanism rather than exegeting Luther. That is, "instead of ignorantly and reflexively regurgitating" pop-apologetic Romanist propaganda about Luther posted on the Internet, why not do a little homework first?
Posts
2 comments:
All my years of relationship with Jesus have given me a lot of discernment in the Spirit. This kind of vocabulary and use of the language by Mr. Shea is 1º of all unspiritual, uncharitable, worldly and rude.
Secondly, even if Luther had believed in the Immaculate Conception, so what? that doesn't prove an iota that that teaching comes from the Holy Spirit. It doesn't constitute grounds to even begin to believe that that is sound doctrine and apostolic teaching. Do they forget that we believe in Sola Scriptura?? Luther is not infallible.
I truly encourage my brethren in Christ not to descend to his level of worldiness and not to use his language to reply this absurd argument.-
Well, I give Mr. Shea credit for at least not using profanity... this time.
Speaking of which, Mr. Shea has been a helpful Romanist apologist in that area: whenever a Roman Catholic complains of Luther's occasional use of unacceptable language, my question in return is: "Why not clean your own house first, starting with your own self-professed apologists, and then we'll talk about Luther?" I've yet to get a cogent response on that one.
Post a Comment