Showing posts with label Pope Adrian VI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pope Adrian VI. Show all posts

Monday, April 20, 2026

Bad Roman Catholic Arguments: Martin Luther's Statements on the Jews

Here's an excerpt from a defender of Roman Catholicism:

[Luther] was a clown. Here’s one for ya, On the Jews and Their Lies” (original German: Von den Juden und ihren Lügen) is a 65,000-word treatise written by Martin Luther in 1543, three years before his death. It is widely recognized as one of Luther’s most virulently antisemitic works, containing harsh theological polemics against Judaism, accusations of blasphemy and “lies,” and concrete recommendations for severe measures against Jewish communities in German territories.

Rome's defenders bring up Martin Luther's harsh writing against the Jews to discredit him entirely. They aim to demonstrate what he wrote was so morally bad, everything else he wrote was equally as bad. Why do they use this argument? Is it because Roman Catholicism has a spotless record of defending the Jewish people? Are they the watchdog of religious intolerance? No. 

1. Sixteenth century Roman Catholicism wrote harshly against the Jews, and these writings had immediate and dire consequences.  

2. Martin Luther's anti-Jewish writings were largely ignored by his associates, other Reformers, and political authorities. Roman Catholic recommendations were not ignored. They were implemented into society, causing harsh results: including the burning of synagogues, the destruction of Jewish books, intense economic hardship, banishment, and public execution.  

This Beggars All entry was also provoked by the overview from these two reputable Reformation sources: 

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. The ghetto system spread throughout the Catholic half of Europe (Lewis W. Spitz, The Protestant Reformation (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1985), p. 357).

[Pope Paul IV] 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… It caused a great burning of books throughout Italy... Ay Venice more than 10,000 books were burned on the Saturday before Palm Sunday.  Sixtus of Siena [a converted Jew that became a Dominican] 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), p. 271). 

Sixteenth Century Roman Catholicism Written Attacks on the Jews 

1555: Cum Nimis Absurdum (Pope Paul IV)

Since it is completely senseless and inappropriate to be in a situation where Christian piety allows the Jews (whose guilt, all of their own doing, has condemned them to eternal slavery) access to our society and even to live among us; indeed, they are without gratitude to Christians, as, instead of thanks for gracious treatment, they return invective, and among themselves, instead of the slavery, which they deserve... (link)

Original text: Cum nimis absurdum et inconveniens existat ut iudaei, quos propria culpa perpetuae servituti submisit, sub praetextu quod pietas christiana illos receptet et eorum cohabitationem sustineat, christianis adeo sint ingrati, ut, eis pro gratia, contumelian reddant, et in eos, pro servitute, quam illis debent, dominatum vendicare procurent (link).

Furthermore, in each and every state, territory and domain in which they are living, they will have only one synagogue, in its customary location, and they will construct no other new ones, nor can they own buildings. Furthermore, all of their synagogues, besides the one allowed, are to be destroyed and demolished. And the properties, which they currently own, they must sell to Christians within a period of time to be determined by the magistrates themselves (link).

Original text: Et in singulis civitatibus, terris et locis in quibus habitaverint, unicam tantum synagogam in loco solito habeant, nec aliam de novo construere, aut bona immobilia possidere possint. Quinimmo omnes eorum synagogas, praeter unam tantum, demoliri et devastare. Ac bona immobilia, qua ad praesens possident, infra tempus eis per ipsos magistratus praesignandum, christianis vendere (link). 

Moreover, concerning the matter that Jews should be recognizable everywhere: [to this end] men must wear a hat, women, indeed, some other evident sign, yellow in color, that must not be concealed or covered by any means, and must be tightly affixed [sewn]; and furthermore, they can not be absolved or excused from the obligation to wear the hat or other emblem of this type to any extent whatever and under any pretext whatsoever of their rank or prominence or of their ability to tolerate [this] adversity, either by a chamberlain of the Church, clerics of an Apostolic court, or their superiors, or by legates of the Holy See or their immediate subordinates (link).

Original text: Et ad hoc ut pro iudaeis ubique dignoscantur, masculi biretum, foeminae vero aliud signum patens, ita ut nullo modo celari aut abscondi possint, glauci coloris, palam deferre teneantur et adstricti sint; nec super non delatione bireti aut alterius signi huiusmodi, praetextu cuiusvis eorum gradus vel priaeminentiae seu toierantiae excusari, aut per eiusdem Ecclesiae camerarium vel Camerae Apostolicae clericos, seu alias illi praesidentes personas, aut Sedis Apostolicae legatos vel eorum vicelegatos quovis modo dispensari aut absolvi possint (link).

Also, they may not have nurses or maids or any other Christian domestic or service by Christian women in wet-nursing or feeding their children (link).

Original text: Nutrices quoque seu ancillas aut alias utriusque sexus servientes christianos habere, vel eorum infantes per mulieres christianas lactari aut nutriri facere (link).  

And they may not presume in any way to play, eat or fraternize with Christians (link).

Original Text: Seu cum ipsis christianis ludere aut comedere vel familiaritatem seu conversationem habere nullatenus praesumant (link). 

And those among them who are physicians, even if summoned and inquired after, cannot attend or take part in the care of Christians (link).

Original text: Et qui ex eis medici fuerint, etiam vocati et rogati, ad curam christianorum accedere aut illi interesse nequeant (link). 

And they are not to be addressed as superiors [even] by poor Christians (link).

Original text: Nec se a pauperibus christianis dominos vocari patiantur (link). 

And, should they, in any manner whatsoever, be deficient in the foregoing, it would be treated as a crime: in Rome, by us or by our clergy, or by others authorized by us, and in the aforementioned states, territories and domains by their respective magistrates, just as if they were rebels and criminals by the jurisdiction in which the offense takes place, they would be accused by all Christian people, by us and by our clergy, and could be punished at the discretion of the proper authorities and judges (Link).

Original text:  Et si circa praemissa in aliquo quomodolibet defecerint, iuxta qualitatem deiicti, in Urbe per nos seu vicarium nostrum, aut alios a nobis deputandos, ac in civitatibus, terris et iocis praedictis per eosdem magistratus, etiam tamquam rebelles et criminis lesae maiestatis rei, ac toto populo christiano diffidati,. nostro et ipsorum vicarii, ac deputandorum et magistratuum arbitrio puniri possint (link). 

When Pope Paul IV cancelled the protection of the Jews, one of the most severe results was the public execution of twenty-five Jews (The Ancona Auto-da-Fé of 1556):

One of the most harrowing episodes unfolded in Ancona, where a group of Portuguese marranos, including the notable physician Amato Lusitano, had found shelter under papal assurances of protection. Paul IV abruptly rescinded these protections, and in 1556, twenty-four marranos, including one woman, were burned alive in a brutal auto-da-fé (a public Inquisition execution) in the city square, while others were imprisoned. One prisoner took his own life in jail, twenty-seven were sent as galley slaves to Malta, and thirty managed to escape by bribing officials. A few found refuge in Pesaro under the protection of the Duke of Urbino, including Lusitano, who later fled to Salonika, where he died during a plague outbreak (link). 

1593: Caeca et Obdurata (Pope Clement VIII)

In the first year of his pontificate, [Pope Paul IV] not only renewed, but also abrogated, several indults and privileges by virtue of which the Jews protected themselves, and restored the same constitution of Paul's predecessor against them, and commanded that it be firmly observed; and finally, by other letters of his, he ordered them to be exiled for ever from all cities, lands, and places of temporal ecclesiastical jurisdiction, except the city of Rome and Ancona, as is more fully contained in their letters (Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum santorum romanorum pontificum 10:23).

Original text: ...pontificatus sui anno primo, non solum innovavit, sed etiam complura indulta et privilegia, quorum obtentu Iudaei se tuebantur, abrogando, eandem Pauli praedecessoris constitutionem adversus illa restituit ac firmiter observari praecipit; ac demum per alias suas litteras eos ab omnibus ditionis temporalis ecclesiasticae civitatibus, terris et locis, urbe Roma et Ancona exceptis, perpetuo exulare iussit, prout in eorum litteris latius continetur  (Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum santorum romanorum pontificum 10:23). 

[The Jews] ...have finally progressed to the point that, contrary to divine, natural, and human laws, by large and heavy interest rates of money, which they demand especially from the poor and needy, by illicit monopolies and usurious agreements, by frauds, deceits in contracting, and by fallacies, they have miserably exhausted, defrauded, and robbed many citizens and inhabitants of the temporal ecclesiastical jurisdiction where they reside, and have reduced especially men of small fortune, especially the rustics and simpletons, not only to extreme poverty and beggary, but almost to servitude; moreover, they have committed many and indeed graver crimes and atrocities themselves, and have most willingly rendered their assistance and whatever assistance they could to every lost and most wicked person committing crimes (Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum santorum romanorum pontificum 10:23). 

Original text:  Quibus postmodum, contra piam eorumdem praedecessorum mentem et intentionem, prave abutentes, eo tandem sunt progressi, ut adversus divinas, naturales humanasque leges, magnis et gravibus usuris pecuniarum, quas praesertim a pauperibus et egenis exigunt, monopoliis illicitis et foeneraticiis pactis, fraudibus, dolis in contrahendo, ac fallaciis, plurimos cives et incolas ditionis temporalis ecclesiasticae, ubi commorantur, misere exhauserint, circumvenerint, bonis spoliaverint, ac tenuis potissimum fortunae homines, praesertim rusticos et simplices, non solum ad extremam inopiam et mendicitatem, sed propemodum in servitutem redegerint; multa praeterea et quidem graviora scelera et flagitia, et ipsi commiserint, et perdito cuique ac nequissimo in facinoribus patrandis suam libentissime operam et quamcumque potuerunt opem praestiterint (Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum santorum romanorum pontificum, 10:23). 

By this constitution of ours, which will be in force forever, we order and command that all and any Jews of either sex who are found in any of the cities of our entire temporal dominion, including those of Bologna and Benevento, towns, lands, camps and places, even those under the same dominion, barons and domiciliaries having any jurisdiction, pre-eminence, title, insignia or exemption, must absolutely, within three months from the day of the publication of the present letters to be made in the Roman Curia, have departed from the borders of the same temporal dominion and Ecclesiastical State and have emigrated to another. Rather, we order both them and others, if they perhaps come to the aforementioned State, to be exiled from the entire aforesaid dominion in the future, not only in our own, but also in perpetual future times, without any hope of being returned; so that any Jews, whether foreigners, present or future, in any city, town, land or place of the said jurisdiction, including those of the householders and barons of this kind, who are found whenever after the lapse of the aforementioned three months, shall be stripped of all their possessions, and the same shall be subject to the same tax laws, and each of them who is found to be of sufficient age and physical strength to sustain that punishment shall be condemned to the triremes for as long as he lives. And this shall be observed everywhere in the entire aforesaid State (excepting only the city of Rome and the cities of Avignon and Ancona), where we have deemed it appropriate to tolerate those who are currently residing there or elsewhere within the aforesaid State, if they prefer to return to the said cities rather than elsewhere, both for the aforementioned reasons and to pursue trade, negotiations and commerce with the Easterners, and because we hope that those, especially those who are closest to our and this See's view, will be tempered from evil deeds by fear of punishment and that some will more easily recognize the light of truth (Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum santorum romanorum pontificum,10:24).
Original text: Hac nostra perpetuo valitura constitutione praecipimus et mandamus ut omnes, et quicumque Iudaei utriuslibet sexus, qui in quibusvis ditionis nostrae temporalis universae civitatibus, etiam Bononiensi et Beneventanae, oppidis, terris, castris et locis, etiam sub eadem ditione consistentium, baronum et domicellorum quamcumque iurisdictionem, praeeminentiam, titulum, insignia seu exemptionem habentium, ad praesens reperiuntur, debeant omnino, intra tres menses, a die publicationis praesentium litterarum in Romana Curia faciendae numerandos, ex eiusdem ditionis temporalis et Status Ecclesiastici finibus discessisse, et alio commigrasse. Quin potius, tam illos quam alios, siqui fortasse ad praedictum Statum accedent, iubemus in posterum a tota ditione praefata, non solum nostris, sed etiam perpetuis futuris temporibus, sine ulla spe redditus, exulare; ita ut quicumque Iudaei, sive peregrini, praesentes aut futuri, in quavis dictae ditionis civitate, oppido, terra vel loco, etiam domicellorum et baronum huiusmodi, quandocumque post lapsum trium mensium praedictorum inventi fuerint, rebus omnibus spolientur, eaeque fisci iuribus applicentur, eorum vero unusquisque, qui aetate et corpore viribus satis firmis ad eam poenam substinendam reperietur, ad triremes, quoad vixerit, sit eo ipso damnatus. Idque in toto Statu praedicto ubique servetur (urbe Roma et Avenionensi atque Anconitana civitatibus dumtaxat exceptis) ubi eos, qui ad praesens ibidem vel alibi intra praedictum Statum degunt, si ad dictas potius civitates quam alio se recipere maluerint, et praedictis de causis, et ad prosequendas cum orientalibus mercaturae, negociationes et commercia, et quia illos praesertim, qui nostro et huius Sedis conspectui proximi sunt, poenae formidine a maleficiis temperaturos atque interdum aliquos lumen veritatis facilius agnituros speramus, censuimus tolerandos (Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum santorum romanorum pontificum,10:24).

1593: Quum Hebraeorum malitia  (Pope Clement VIII)

And adding these things to them, to all and singular universities of the Hebrews, and to each of them, as well in the temporal dominion of the Holy Roman Church as also outside it in whatever places and in whatever parts of the Christian world they are established, we perpetually prohibit that they dare [to have] any books and impious Talmudic codices so often condemned, the most vain, kabbalistic, and other nefarious [books] prohibited and condemned by our predecessors, and also works, commentaries, treatises, volumes, and any writings whatsoever, whether composed in the Hebrew language or any other up to this time, or translated, published, and printed, or to be written, translated, published, or printed in the future, containing or comprising, tacitly or expressly, heresies or errors against the sacred scriptures of the Old Law and Testament; also insults, impieties, blasphemies against God, the most holy Trinity, and our Savior the Lord Jesus Christ, and His holy Christian faith; and the most blessed Mary, His Mother ever Virgin, and the blessed Angels, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and other saints of God, the most sacred Cross, the sacraments of the New Law, sacred images, and the holy Catholic Church and the Apostolic See; and against the faithful of Christ, especially bishops, priests, and other ecclesiastical persons, and also against those newly converted to the same faith of Christ, and neophytes, and others against the Catholicism...(Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum santorum romanorum pontificum 10:26).

Original; text:  Atque illis haec addentes, omnibus et quibuscumque universitatibus Hebraeorum, eorumque singulis, tam in temporali S. R. E. ditione quam etiam extra eam ubivis locorum et in quibusvis christiani orbis partibus consistant, perpetuo prohibemus ne quovis libros et codices impios Thalmudicos toties damnatos, vanissimos, cabalisticos atque alios nefarios a praedecessoribus nostris prohibitos et condemnatos, necnon opera, commentaria, tractatus, volumina et scripta quaecumque, sive lingua hebraica quam quavis alia hactenus conscripta, vel versa, edita et impressa, ut in posterum conscribenda vel vertenda, edenda aut imprimenda, continentes seu continentes, tacite vel expresse, haereses vel errores contra sacras Veteris Legis et Testamenti scripturas, necnon contumelias, impietates, blasphemias contra Deum, sanctissimam Trinitatem et Salvatorem nostrum Dominum Iesum Christum, illiusque sacram christianam fidem; ac beatissimam ipsius Genitricem semper Virginem Mariam, et beatos Angelos, patriarchas, prophetas, apostolos aliosque sanctos Dei, sacratissimam Crucem, novae Legis sacramenta, sacras imagines et sanctam catholicam ecclesiam et Sedem Apostolicam, ac contra christifideles, praesertim episcopos, sacerdotes et alias ecclesiasticas personas, atque etiam contra nuper ad eamdem Christi fidem conversos, neophytos et alios contra religionem... (Bullarum Diplomatum 10:26).

Moreover, [we revoke] all and any faculties, letters, permissions pardons, tolerances to read, hold, even for a certain or uncertain time, or on other pretexts, as preferred, any writings, volumes, books and other things prohibited abovementioned to any Jews, in general or in particular, by our predecessors and the said Apostolic See or its legates, also from the side or messengers or inquisitorial of heretical wickedness, or local Ordinaries or any others... (Bullarum Diplomatum 10:26).

Original text: Omnes vero et quascumque facultates, litteras, permissiones, indulta, tolerantias legendi, tenendi, etiam ad tempus certum vel incertum, vel aliis praetextibus quaecumque, ut praefertur, prohibita scripta, volumina, libros et alia supradicta quibusvis Iudaeis, in genere vel in specie, a praedecessoribus nostris et dicta Sede Apostolica seu eius legatis, etiam de latere vel nunciis aut inquisito ribus haereticae pravitatis, aut locorum Ordinariis vel quibusvis aliis...(Bullarum Diplomatum 10:26).

Therefore, we command our venerable brothers, both the cardinals, general inquisitors against heretical wickedness throughout the world, as well as the patriarchs, primates, archbishops, bishops and other local ordinaries and inquisitors of the same heretical wickedness, in whatever kingdoms, provinces and cities exist for the time being, by apostolic writings, that they and their individuals, in cities, lands and places where Jews reside, both in their synagogues and public and private places, in their homes or workshops and everywhere else, including among Christian booksellers, search most diligently for the aforementioned, thus forbidden books and writings, by themselves or by someone or others to be appointed by them, and against those who are found guilty of this kind of retention, to the aforementioned and other They shall proceed to the execution of the more severe penalties at their discretion. Whoever contradicts or disobeys, or who gives them aid, advice or favor, shall be restrained by appropriate remedies of law and fact, after an appeal; also invoking for this purpose, if necessary, the help of the secular arm (Bullarum Diplomatum 10:27).

Original text: Quocirca venerabilibus fratribus nostris, tam S. R. E. cardinalibus adversus haereticam pravitatem in toto terrarum orbe generalibus inquisitoribus, quam etiam patriarchis, primatibus, archiepiscopis, episcopis ceterisque locorum Ordinariis et inquisitoribus quibuscumque eiusdem haereticae pravitatis, in quibusvis regnis, provinciis et civitatibus pro tempore existentibus, per apostolica scripta mandamus quatenus ipsi et eorum singuli, in civitatibus, terris et locis, ubi Iudaei commorantur, tam in eorum synagogis et locis publicis quam privatis, domibus aut officinis et alias ubique locorum, etiam apud bibliopolas christianos praedictos, sic prohibitos libros et scripta, per se vel alium seu alios ab eis deputandos, diligentissime perquirant, et contra eos, qui super retentione huiusmodi culpabiles reperti fuerint, ad praedictarum et aliarum etiam graviorum eorum arbitrio poenarum exequutionem procedant. Contradictores necnon inobedientes quoscumque, eisve auxilium, consilium vel favorem praestantes, per opportuna iuris et facti remedia,appellatione postposita, compescendo; invocato etiam ad hoc, si opus fuerit, auxilio brachii saecularis (Bullarum Diplomatum 10:27).  

Sixteenth Century Responses to Martin Luther's Anti-Jewish Writings 

Most of Luther’s proposals [found in On the Jews and Their Lies] are paralleled in the other anti-Jewish literature of the period, but the specific formulation which follows may be attributed to him. Fortunately… most of the authorities proved unwilling to carry out his recommendations, whether out of horror at their inhumanity or out of self-interest (since Jews played an important role in the economy) (LW 47:268, fn. 173).

Already upon its first appearance in the year 1543, Luther’s treatise [On the Jews and Their Lies] caused widespread dismay, not only among contemporary Jews but also in Protestant circles. Melanchthon and Osiander are known to have been unhappy with its severity. Henry Bullinger, in correspondence with Martin Bucer, remarked that Luther’s views reminded him of those of the Inquisitors. And a subsequent document prepared by the churches of Zurich declared (speaking specifically of the treatise Vom Schem Hamphoras , published later in 1543), that “if it had been written by a swineherd, rather than by a celebrated shepherd of souls, it might have some—but very little—justification" (LW 47:123).
 

Nobody took Luther's programme seriously, and the new mandate of John Frederick in 1543, though severe, was on other lines. Three years later, as we shall see, Jews were still living unmolested in the Mansfeld area (Gordon Rupp, Martin Luther and the Jews (London: The Council of Christians and Jews, 1972), p. 18).

The question of Protestant acceptance or rejection of Luther's writings on the Jews is focused on his late, hate-filled polemics. Oberman has pointed out that Luther's close associate, Philipp Melanchthon, "was just as unhappy over the harsh writings on the Jews of the late Luther as were some of the leading city reformers." The Nuremberg Reformer and disciple of Luther, Osiander... wrote an anonymous apology for Luther's polemics. And Luther's lifelong colleague Justus Jonas used his role as Latin translator of Luther's writings against the Jews to do "his utmost to offset Luther's exasperated disenchantment with the mission to the Jews and in the process manages to draw an entirely novel and positive picture of them." This selective rejection of Luther is evident in the refusal of evangelical political authorities to follow through on Luther's recommendations. Because Luther was such an authority figure for Lutherans, it is striking that in 1611 when the Lutheran city of Hamburg asked the theological faculties of Jena and Frankfurt an der Oder whether the Jews fleeing from Portugal should have the right to remain in the city, both faculties answered in the affirmative. The Jena opinion self-consciously chose Luther's early, tolerant opinions over his later, intolerant ones. More important for future developments was the fact that Luther's portrayals and recommendations were not incorporated into the Lutheran confessional writings and Lutheran devotional literature. "For the decades after Luther's death all the evidence seems to support Lewin's thesis that Luther's late works on the Jews failed to achieve their intended effect” (Carter Lindberg, “Tainted Greatness: Luther’s Attitudes Toward Judaism and Their Historical Reception,” in Nancy A Harrowitz (ed.), Tainted Greatness: Antisemitism and Cultural Heroes, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1994), p. 23).

The reaction of contemporaries to Luther's anti-Jewish writings indicates fairly clearly that his readers saw a significant difference between the early and the later treatises. That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew appears to have been received with favor among Protestants, Jews, and Jewish converts (Marranos). Some Marranos in the Netherlands may even have translated the work into Spanish and sent copies to their brethren in Spain. The treatise may have even reached Palestine. It may also have encouraged several South Germans to work for the amelioration of the treatment of the Jews. On the other hand, it may have lent some support to the Catholic charge, aired, for instance, at the Diet of Augsburg in 1530, that the Protestants had learned their doctrine from the Jews.

Protestant reaction was mixed. Melanchthon sent a copy of On the Jews and Their Lies to Landgrave Philipp of Hesse with the mild recommendation that the book contained "much useful teaching." When he sent a copy of On the Ineffable Name, however, he failed to add a similar recommendation. It is hard to say whether this indicates disapproval; generally speaking, Melanchthon was uncomfortable with the violent tone of many of the writings of the older Luther. Andreas Osiander of Nuremberg appears to have been critical of the work, although unwilling to confront Luther with his objections. Luther's Zurich opponents, the authors of the 1545 True Confession, branded Luther's On the Ineffable Name as "swinish" and "filthy," and remarked that had it been written by a swineherd and not by a famous shepherd of souls, there might have been some although little excuse for it (Mark U Edwards, Luther’s Last Battles (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983), p. 135). 

...[I] seems that Luther’s sociopolitical recommendations regarding the Jewish people largely went ignored by contemporary political leaders. The violent internal struggle of Christianity turned the animus of the Lutheran Protestants away from Jews and onto Roman Catholics in the post-Luther Germany of the sixteenth century. Though a great deal more research needs to be done, it seems that the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries saw no significant employment of Luther’s Judenschriften on the part of German Protestants in the service of anti-Judaic or antisemitic goals. Luther's influence on Protestant approaches to the Jewish Question appears to have been rather uncertain until at least the late nineteenth, or perhaps the early twentieth century (Christopher J. Probst, Demonizing the Jews, pp. 57-58).

The immediate effects of Luther's final attacks against the Jews was minimal... Only in Electoral Saxony, Luther's home territory, were his radical steps against the Jews partially implemented. Jews could no longer travel through the territory in 1543 because of alleged attempts to convert Christians. But in Hesse and Brandenburg, Luther's advice, communicated in letters, was ignored (Eric W. Gritsch, Martin Luther's Anti-Semitism, p. 97).  

 


Conclusion
This historical information above demonstrates why Roman Catholics bringing up Martin Luther's anti-Jewish writings are utilizing a very bad argument. Roman Catholicism treated the Jews harshly in the sixteenth century. If Luther's harsh attitude towards the Jews is proof that his theology is invalid, then similarly, Rome's theology is invalid by their own argument! If an argument also works against one's own position, it's not a valid argument! You've refuted yourself.  

The story of Martin Luther's negativity towards the Jews is really to tell the story of medieval Christianity against the Jews. Luther wrote words. Roman Catholicism also utilized words... that resulted in immediate brutal action. Informed Roman Catholics realize this. I've rarely come across any thoughtful Roman Catholic utilizing Luther's writings against the Jews. They realize their Roman Catholic atrocities far surpass anything Luther wrote on the Jews. 

Addendum: Roman Catholic Attacks Against Lutherans

Not only did Roman Catholicism write and act harshly against the Jews, but they also attacked another group.... a people known as "Lutherans."

1521: Decet Romanum (Pope Leo X) 

On all these we decree the sentences of excommunication, of anathema, of our perpetual condemnation and interdict; of privation of dignities, honours and property on them and their descendants, and of declared unfitness for such possessions; of the confiscation of their goods and of the crime of treason; and these and the other sentences, censures and punishments which are inflicted by canon law on heretics and are set out in our aforesaid missive, we decree to have fallen on all these men to their damnation. We add to our present declaration, by our Apostolic authority, that states, territories, camps, towns and places in which these men have temporarily lived or chanced to visit, along with their possessions—cities which house cathedrals and metropolitans, monasteries and other religious and sacred places, privileged or unprivileged—one and all are placed under our ecclesiastical interdict, while this interdict lasts, no pretext of Apostolic Indulgence (except in cases the law allows, and even there, as it were, with the doors shut and those under excommunication and interdict excluded) shall avail to allow the celebration of mass and the other divine offices. We prescribe and enjoin that the men in question are everywhere to be denounced publicly as excommunicated, accursed, condemned, interdicted, deprived of possessions and incapable of owning them. They are to be strictly shunned by all faithful Christians (Pope Leo X, Decet Romanum 1521). 

Original text: nominatim exprimi possent, decernimus excommunicationis et etiam anathematis, necnon maledictionis aeternae et interdicti, ac in eos et eorum descendentes dignitatum, honorum et bonorum privationis et inhabilitationis ad illa, necnon bonorum confiscationis et criminis laesae maiestatis et alias sententias, censuras et poenas, etiam in haereticos a canonibus inflictas, in dictis literis contentas, damnabiliter incidisse. Civitates quoque, terras, castra, oppida et loca, in quibus tunc pro tempore fuerint, et ad quae eos declinare contigerit, ac quae in illis sunt, ac alias etiam cathedrales et metropolitanas, monasteria et alia religiosa et pia loca, etiam exempta et non exempta, quaecumque ecclesiastico interdicto supposita esse; ita ut, illo durante, praetextu cuiusvis indulti apostolici, praeterquam in casibus a iure permissis, et in illis, non alias quam ianuis clausis ac excommunicatis et interdictis exclusis, nequeant missae et alia divina officia celebrari, apostolica auctoritate, tenore praesentium, declaramus; illosque pro excommunicatis et anathematizatis, maledictis, interdictis, privatis et inhabilibus, ubicumque locorum denunciari et publicari, ac ab omnibus christifidelibus arctius evitari praecipimus et mandamus (Bullarum Romanum vol. 5:762).

 

1523: Instruktion des Papstes (Pope Adrian VI) 

Since, therefore, Luther and his followers condemn the councils of the holy fathers, burn the sacred canons, and confuse all things according to their own whim and disturb the whole world, it is manifest that they, as public enemies and disturbers of the peace, ought to be exterminated by all lovers of that same peace (Instruktion des Papstes Adrian VI, Google translate).

Original text: Cum igitur Lutherus et sui concilia sanctorum patrum condemnant,sacros canones conburant et cuncta pro arbitrio suo confundant ac totum mundum perturbent, manifestum est eos tanquam publice pacis inimicos et perturbatores ab omnibus eiusdem pacis amatoribus exterminandos esse. (Instruktion des Papstes Adrian VI).

Monday, March 02, 2026

Which Roman Catholic Interpretation of Martin Luther and the Reformation is Correct?

The stained-glass image to the left depicts Thomas Aquinas stepping on the neck of Martin Luther and vanquishing him. Or, to quote the defender of Rome that posted this picture, 

A beautiful mosaic of the Angelic Doctor St Thomas Aquinas stepping on the neck of Luther the heretic. The Church will always prevail over protestantism. In 100 years, your protestant sect will be extinct and forgotten, but the Church will still be here. Because we were founded by God and we are invincible.

This harsh bravado is typical of low-hanging fruit online Roman Catholic fodder. For those of you actively engaged in social media, this may seem hard to believe... but this rage-bait sentiment does not reflect the entirety of modern-day Roman Catholicism. Frankly, Roman Catholics are not unified in their analysis of Martin Luther and the Reformation. They have a spectrum of conservative to liberal, from cafeteria Roman catholic to informed (in some sense), from harsh polemic to kind encounter. 

Why are there a variety of personal opinions put forth by Rome's defenders on Luther and the Reformation?

Martin Luther Was Not Named by the Decrees of the Council of Trent
The answer is that there is no official Roman Catholic interpretation on Martin Luther and the Reformation which binds them. Note this statement from Roman Catholic theologian Irwin Iserloh describing that Luther was not named in the decrees of the Council of Trent and its significance: 

[No] Reformers were condemned. Only teachings which were ascribed to them were struck with an anathema, without their being themselves individually named. This procedure of the Council was based on an instruction from the highest authority. Already in his instruction of December 31, 1546, the cardinal nephew, Alessandro Farnese, had laid down the principle that heretical teachings and not individually named persons were to be condemned. That would facilitate the procedure, but also leave open for Protestants the way to Trent. This principle was once more confirmed in February, 1547, and remained normative for the practice of all three periods.

It was clear that Trent was in this regard out of step with most of the earlier councils. Joachim of Flora had been condemned by name at the Fourth Lateran Council, and Wyclif and Hus at Constance. To the contrary, the Council of Trent, as Hubert Jedin wrote, "was not to become a tribunal." Errors would be rejected and with a view to bringing clarity to doctrinal confusion, no persons would be condemned. The rejections also related not just to teachings ascribed to the Reformers. No less opposition, as is evident, for example, in the first three canons on justification, was directed against the Pelagian currents in late medieval nominalistic theology. Canon 1 reads: "Whoever maintains that man through his own works, which are accomplished by the power of human nature or in accord with the teaching of the Law, without divine grace, which here is through Jesus Christ, can become justified before God, let him be anathema" (DS 1551). In this statement of teaching, to be sure, no Protestants are condemned. On the contrary, the endeavor here is related to doing justice to the basic concern of the Reformation.

Author James Atkinson echoes this point:
[Roman Catholic scholar Karl Rahner] reminds us of [Roman Catholic scholar Hubert Jedin’s] point, that Catholicism never condemned Luther by name at Trent, and that no official judgment on Luther exists by which a loyal Catholic is bound. He says that Catholicism may reject a certain aspect of Luther’s teaching, but that Roman Catholic the¬ ology has much to learn from him today nonetheless. These are heartening and hopeful words (James Atkinson, Martin Luther: Prophet to the Church Catholic, [p. 30). 
Roman Catholic scholar Hubert Jedin documents that the debate over officially making a pronouncement on Luther and the Reformers officially heretics was an issue for Roman Catholic authorities in the sixteenth century. There were those in attendance at the Council of Trent that wanted to condemn individuals Protestants like they did in the old days. For instance:
Claramontanus. Heretics should be summoned to a council to account for their assertions or, if they repent, to confess their error, as has been done in other councils. He holds that the articles condemned by the holy fathers and judged worthy of condemnation should be anathematized; those that are doubtful will be dealt with at another time (DeepL English translation).

Original text: Claramontanus. Oportet vocari ad concilium haereticos, qui de suis assertionibus rationem redderent, vel resipiscentes errorem suum faterentur, ut in aliis conciliis factum est. Censet articulos damnatos a sanctis patribus et damnandos iudicatos damnarí sub anathemate; de iis, qui dubii sunt, alias agetur. 

Also as an example, on the Sacraments, the Bishop of Astorga stated, "let the Council condemn specific articles extracted from the writings of the Protestants, and with the indication of the names of their authors." Jedin continues:
However, a change such as this, which would have turned the Council into a tribunal, did not materialise, but the legates took the proposals of the two Spaniards, which were supported by several Italians (for instance by the Bishops of Bertinoro and Alife), so seriously, that they reported on them to Rome and asked for instructions. The Pope upheld the earlier policy, namely, a clear differentiation between the Catholic and Protestant doctrinal position, but there was to be no condemnation by name of Protestant authors.

This is confirmed in a letter from Cardinal Alessandro Farnese:

As for the mention made in congregation about condemning the authors of heresies by name, I believe that until last year this point was doubted and finally resolved that it should not be done, so as not to enter into the lengths and intricacies of citations and processes (Google translate).

Original text: Quanto alla mentione fatta in congregatione, di condennare nominatamente li autori delle heresie, credo, che insino l'anno passato fusse dubitato di questo punto et resoluto all' ultimo, che non si facesse per non entrar' in lunghezze et intrighi di citationi et. processi.

 It is true that some of the theological positions Martin Luther and the Reformers were blatantly condemned by the Council of Trent as heretical. However, in choosing to not name them, the Council of Trent thrust Luther and the Reformers into a sort of undefined linguistic limbo.  They are not dogmatically personally heretics, but some of what they held was heretical. This allows Rome's defenders to have the freedom to choose whichever path out of linguistic limbo they want. For those defenders of Rome that long for the good 'ol days of pin the tail on the heretic, they can point to what Luther and the Reformers wrote and classify them at least as holding heretical opinions, therefore they are heretics. On the other hand, those Roman Catholics that have deep streaks of modern-day ecumenism running through their veins can look for the positive aspects of Luther and the Reformation as a means to bring separated brethren back into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.  

How did this all come about? The answer lies in first presenting the conflicting opinions of popes and then seeing the development of ecumenical Reformation Roman Catholic scholarship.


The Popes, Luther and the Reformation
Currently, Roman Catholic authorities seem kind to Martin Luther and the Reformation while in previous centuries they were excessively hostile. Which Popes are right about Luther, those from the sixteenth century or those from the twentieth / twenty-first century? The former says he's a heretical wild boar. Those infected by Luther's errors are in eternal danger. Those in the twentieth / twenty-first centuries say Luther was honestly pursuing God, and those following along with him are the unfortunate sufferers of being separated brothers and sisters of the Roman Catholic church, lacking the fullness of the truth.  

Let's take a closer look at some papal comments about Martin Luther and the Reformation to demonstrate the severe disconnect between the ways the earlier popes understood Luther and the Reformation and those that came in the twentieth / twenty-first centuries. They once held Luther and his followers were damnable heretic needed to be exterminated, but then centuries later they said the exact opposite.


Sixteenth Century

Pope Leo X (1513-1521)

...foxes have arisen seeking to destroy the vineyard whose winepress you alone have trod. When you were about to ascend to your Father, you committed the care, rule, and administration of the vineyard, an image of the triumphant church, to Peter, as the head and your vicar and his successors. The wild boar from the forest seeks to destroy it and every wild beast feeds upon it (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).

Against the Roman Church, you [Peter] warned, lying teachers are rising, introducing ruinous sects, and drawing upon themselves speedy doom. Their tongues are fire, a restless evil, full of deadly poison. They have bitter zeal, contention in their hearts, and boast and lie against the truth (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).

...a new Porphyry rises who, as the old once wrongfully assailed the holy apostles, now assails the holy pontiffs, our predecessors (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).

[Luther] is like the heretics “whose last defense,” as Jerome says, “is to start spewing out a serpent’s venom with their tongue when they see that their causes are about to be condemned, and spring to insults when they see they are vanquished” (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520). 

No one of sound mind is ignorant how destructive, pernicious, scandalous, and seductive to pious and simple minds these various errors [of Luther's] are, how opposed they are to all charity and reverence for the holy Roman Church who is the mother of all the faithful and teacher of the faith; how destructive they are of the vigor of ecclesiastical discipline, namely obedience. This virtue is the font and origin of all virtues and without it anyone is readily convicted of being unfaithful.

Therefore we, in this above enumeration, important as it is, wish to proceed with great care as is proper, and to cut off the advance of this plague and cancerous disease so it will not spread any further in the Lord’s field as harmful thornbushes (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).

We have found that these errors or theses are not Catholic, as mentioned above, and are not to be taught, as such; but rather are against the doctrine and tradition of the Catholic Church, and against the true interpretation of the sacred Scriptures received from the Church...  For, according to these errors, or any one or several of them, it clearly follows that the Church which is guided by the Holy Spirit is in error and has always erred (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).

 ...we condemn, reprobate, and reject completely each of these theses or errors as either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears or seductive of simple minds, and against Catholic truth. By listing them, we decree and declare that all the faithful of both sexes must regard them as condemned, reprobated, and rejected . . . We restrain all in the virtue of holy obedience and under the penalty of an automatic major excommunication…. (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).

Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained in the books or writings of Martin Luther, we likewise condemn, reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and sermons of the said Martin, whether in Latin or any other language, containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected. We forbid each and every one of the faithful of either sex, in virtue of holy obedience and under the above penalties to be incurred automatically, to read, assert, preach, praise, print, publish, or defend them. They will incur these penalties if they presume to uphold them in any way, personally or through another or others, directly or indirectly, tacitly or explicitly, publicly or occultly, either in their own homes or in other public or private places. Indeed immediately after the publication of this letter these works, wherever they may be, shall be sought out carefully by the ordinaries and others [ecclesiastics and regulars], and under each and every one of the above penalties shall be burned publicly and solemnly in the presence of the clerics and people (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).
Therefore we can, without any further citation or delay, proceed against him to his condemnation and damnation as one whose faith is notoriously suspect and in fact a true heretic with the full severity of each and all of the above penalties and censures (Pope Leo X Exsurge Domine 1520).

Nevertheless Martin himself—and it gives us grievous sorrow and perplexity to say this—the slave of a depraved mind, has scorned to revoke his errors within the prescribed interval and to send us word of such revocation, or to come to us himself; nay, like a stone of stumbling, he has feared not to write and preach worse things than before against us and this Holy See and the Catholic faith, and to lead others on to do the same.

He has now been declared a heretic; and so also others, whatever their authority and rank, who have cared nought of their own salvation but publicly and in all men’s eyes become followers of Martin’s pernicious and heretical sect, and given him openly and publicly their help, counsel and favour, encouraging him in their midst in his disobedience and obstinacy, or hindering the publication of our said missive: such men have incurred the punishments set out in that missive, and are to be treated rightfully as heretics and avoided by all faithful Christians, as the Apostle says (Titus iii. 10-11). (Pope Leo X, Decet Romanum 1521).

Our purpose is that such men should rightfully be ranked with Martin and other accursed heretics and excommunicates, and that even as they have ranged themselves with the obstinacy in sinning of the said Martin, they shall likewise share his punishments and his name, by bearing with them everywhere the title “Lutheran” and the punishments it incurs (Pope Leo X, Decet Romanum 1521).

Our decrees which follow are passed against Martin and others who follow him in the obstinacy of his depraved and damnable purpose, as also against those who defend and protect him with a military bodyguard, and do not fear to support him with their own resources or in any other way, and have and do presume to offer and afford help, counsel and favour toward him. All their names, surnames and rank—however lofty and dazzling their dignity may be—we wish to be taken as included in these decrees with the same effect as if they were individually listed and could be so listed in their publication, which must be furthered with an energy to match their contents (Pope Leo X, Decet Romanum 1521).

We would make known to all the small store that Martin, his followers and the other rebels have set on God and his Church by their obstinate and shameless temerity. We would protect the herd from one infectious animal, lest its infection spread to the healthy ones (Pope Leo X, Decet Romanum 1521). 

Pope Adrian VI (1522-1523)

...the greatest sorrow by which we are afflicted from the prosperity of the Lutheran sect, chiefly for this reason: because we see innumerable souls, redeemed by the blood of Christ and committed to our pastoral care, being turned away on that occasion from the true faith and religion and going into perdition (Instruktion des Papstes Adrian VI, Google translate).

Fourth, let the injury move them which is inflicted by Luther upon them and their parents and ancestors; for since their parents and ancestors and they themselves have always held the faith which the Roman and Catholic Church approves, and Luther and his followers hold a far different faith—asserting many things not to be of faith which they nevertheless held to be of faith—it is manifest that they are condemned by Luther as infidels and heretics. Consequently, according to Luther, all their ancestors who died in our faith are in hell, since error in faith makes men guilty of damnation (Instruktion des Papstes Adrian VI, Google translate).

Seventh, let them consider that Luther uses nearly the same way to seduce the Christian people that the most filthy Muhammad used to deceive so many thousands of souls: namely, by permitting those things to which carnal men are inclined, and thereafter exempting them from those things which seem more grave in our law; except that Luther seems to act a little more modestly, so that he may deceive more effectively. Muhammad granted the license of having many wives and of repelling them at will and marrying others; this man [Luther], so that he may conciliate to himself the favors of monks and virgins dedicated to God and of priests eager for the lewdness of the flesh, preaches that vows of perpetual continence are even illicit, much less not obligatory. Therefore, he says it is lawful for them by evangelical liberty to marry, unmindful of the word of the Apostle when he says concerning younger widows that when they have become wanton against Christ, they wish to marry, having damnation because they have made void their first faith (1 Timothy 5:11). With these things having been set forth by you, and many others which [you may] collect partly from the examples of our letters, partly from your own prudence you will be able to devise [further arguments]. You shall exhort, in our name, the said princes, prelates, and peoples, that they may finally wake up and be stirred to resist both such a great injury, which the Lutherans are known to inflict upon God and His sacred religion, and the greatest ignominy, which they inflict upon your entire German nation—and upon the princes themselves—and the greatest disgrace and insult, which they inflict upon their ancestors whom (as we have said) they in effect condemn to hell. Let them proceed entirely to the execution of the Apostolic sentence and the aforementioned Imperial Edict [the Edict of Worms] (Instruktion des Papstes Adrian VI, Google translate).

But if anyone should perchance say that Luther was condemned by the Apostolic See without being heard and without a defense, and that therefore he ought to be heard and should not be condemned before being convicted, you shall respond: that those things which belong to faith must be believed on account of divine authority, not proved. "Away with arguments," says Ambrose, "where faith is sought; the fishermen are believed, not the dialecticians." And certainly we confess that a defense ought not to be denied to him in matters of fact—that is, whether he said [something] or not, whether he preached or wrote it or not, etc. But concerning divine law and the matter of the sacraments, one must stand by the authority of the saints and the Church (Instruktion des Papstes Adrian VI, Google translate).

Since, therefore, Luther and his followers condemn the councils of the holy fathers, burn the sacred canons, and confuse all things according to their own whim and disturb the whole world, it is manifest that they, as public enemies and disturbers of the peace, ought to be exterminated by all lovers of that same peace (Instruktion des Papstes Adrian VI, Google translate).

Twentieth Century
The twentieth century popes began with echoing that of the sixteenth century popes.

Pope Pius X (1903-1914)

Fast forward to the beginning of the twentieth century. Pope Pius X (1903-1914)  stated:  

"Protestantism as proudly called by its founders, is the sum of all the heresies, that have been before it, after it, and that could still be born to slaughter the souls." 

Original text:  Il protestantesimo o religione riformata, come orgogliosamente la chiamarono i suoi fondatori, è la somma di tutte le eresie, che furono prima di esso, che sono state dopo, e che potranno nascere ancora a fare strage delle anime. 

Certainly this suffices to show superabundantly by how many roads Modernism leads to the annihilation of all religion. The first step in this direction was taken by Protestantism; the second is made by Modernism; the next will plunge headlong into atheism (Pascendi Dominici Gregis Encyclical of Pope Pius X on the Doctrines of the Modernists).

Pope Pius X was not tolerant of ecumenism towards Protestants. He lumped all Protestants in with modernism, that movement of liberalism within theology that infiltrated the ivory towers of academia (philosophy, history, sciences), for him most particularly, Roman Catholic scholarship. Protestantism, according to Pius X, was that movement that ushered in the destruction of religion. Pius also called modernism the "sum" or "synthesis" of all heresies.  

Another twentieth century Pope Pius echoed this sentiment in honoring the memory of anti-Protestant polemicist Francis de Sales, Pope Pius XI (1922- 1939). He spoke of the "heresies begotten by the Reformation."

In 1959, Pope John XXIII began the shift towards a friendly approach to Protestants. Let's pick up with Pope John XXIII statement that Protestants are not the sum of all heresies and soul killers, but are rather, "separater brethren."classifying Protestants as "separated brethren" led to a different kinder approach from the later popes toward Martin Luther.

Pope John XXIII (1958-1963)

79. We address Ourselves now to all of you who are separated from this Apostolic See. May this wonderful Spectacle of unity, by which the Catholic Church is set apart and distinguished, as well as the prayers and entreaties with which she begs God for unity, stir your hearts and awaken you to what is really in your best interest. 80. May We, in fond anticipation, address you as sons and brethren? May We hope with a father's love for your return? (Ad Petri Cathedram Encyclical of Pope John xxiii on Truth, Unity and Peace, in a Spirit of Charity, June 29, 1959).

86. We address, then, as brethren all who are separated from Us, using the words of Saint Augustine: "Whether they wish it or not, they are our brethren. They cease to be our brethren only when they stop saying 'Our Father'" (Ad Petri Cathedram Encyclical of Pope John xxiii on Truth, Unity and Peace, in a Spirit of Charity, June 29, 1959).

Wherefore, to all Our brethren and sons who are separated from the Chair of Blessed Peter, We say again: "I am . . . Joseph, your brother." Come, "make room for us."  We want nothing else, desire nothing else, pray God for nothing else but your salvation, your eternal happiness (Ad Petri Cathedram Encyclical of Pope John xxiii on Truth, Unity and Peace, in a Spirit of Charity, June 29, 1959).

96. We pray earnestly to the Blessed Virgin Mary, to whose Immaculate Heart Our predecessor, Pius XII, consecrated the entire human race. May she seek and obtain from God this harmonious unity, this true, active, and militant peace, on behalf of Our children in Christ and all those who, though separated from Us, cannot help loving truth, unity and peace (Ad Petri Cathedram Encyclical of Pope John xxiii on Truth, Unity and Peace, in a Spirit of Charity, June 29, 1959).

Unhappily, however, the entire Christian family has not as yet fully and perfectly attained to this visible unity in the truth. But the Catholic Church considers it her duty to work actively for the fulfillment of that great mystery of unity for which Christ prayed so earnestly to His heavenly Father on the eve of His great sacrifice. The knowledge that she is so intimately associated with that prayer is for her an occasion of ineffable peace and joy. And why should she not rejoice sincerely when she sees Christ's prayer extending its salvific and ever increasing efficacy even over those who are not of her fold? (Solemn Opening of Vatican Ecumenical Council ii gaudet mater ecclesia opening address of the holy father pope john xxiii,11 October 1962).

The great desire, therefore, of the Catholic Church in raising aloft at this Council the torch of truth, is to show herself to the world as the loving mother of all mankind; gentle, patient, and full of tenderness and sympathy for her separated children (Solemn Opening of Vatican Ecumenical Council ii gaudet mater ecclesia opening address of the holy father pope john xxiii,11 October 1962).

There is also a unity of prayer and ardent longing prompting Christians separated from this Apostolic See to aspire to union with us. And finally there is a unity, which consists in the esteem and respect shown for the Catholic Church by members of various non-Christian religions. (Solemn Opening of Vatican Ecumenical Council ii gaudet mater ecclesia opening address of the holy father pope john xxiii,11 October 1962).

Nor do We wish to forget Our separated brethren for whom Our prayers rise unceasingly to Heaven so that the promise of Christ may be fulfilled: one Shepherd and one flock (Christmas Message of Pope John XXIII, December 23, 1959).

Pope Paul VI (1963-1978)

Everywhere large numbers have felt the impulse of this grace, and among our separated brethren also there increases from day to day the movement, fostered by the grace of the Holy Spirit, for the restoration of unity among all Christians. This movement toward unity is called "ecumenical." Those belong to it who invoke the Triune God and confess Jesus as Lord and Savior, doing this not merely as individuals but also as corporate bodies. For almost everyone regards the body in which he has heard the Gospel as his Church and indeed, God's Church. All however, though in different ways, long for the one visible Church of God, a Church truly universal and set forth into the world that the world may be converted to the Gospel and so be saved, to the glory of God (Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio).

Even in the beginnings of this one and only Church of God there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly condemned. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions made their appearance and quite large communities came to be separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame. The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church - whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church - do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church (Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio).

The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation (Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio).


Pope John Paul II (1978-2005)

Pope John Paul II was the first pope to truly change the magisterial opinion on Martin Luther.  He rereferred to Luther as a man of "profound piety." 

Consequently Luther's profound piety that, with burning passion, was driven by questioning on eternal salvation, is clearly delineated.

Pope John Paul II also stated:

The deep religiosity of Luther, who was driven by a burning passion for the question of eternal salvation, has become convincingly visible. Of course, it has also become clear that the rupture of church unity can be traced back neither to a lack of understanding on the part of the pastors of the Catholic Church nor to a lack of understanding of true Catholicism on the part of Luther alone, however much this may have played a role. The decisions at stake went deeper. In the dispute over the relationship between faith and tradition, fundamental questions of the correct interpretation and appropriation of the Christian faith were at play, the church-dividing effect of which cannot be overcome by mere historical understanding (botschaft von johannes paul ii. an kard. johannes willebrands, präsident des sekretariats für die einheit der christen, 1983, Google English translation).

Original text: Jahrhunderts geführt. Überzeugend sichtbar geworden ist dabei die tiefe Religiosität Luthers, der von der brennenden Leidenschaft für die Frage nach dem ewigen Heil getrieben war. Deutlich geworden ist freilich auch, daß sich der Bruch der Kircheneinheit weder auf Unverständnis seitens der Hirten der katholischen Kirche noch auf mangelndes Verstehen des wahren Katholizismus auf seiten Luthers allein zurückführen läßt, so sehr solches mitgespielt haben mag. Die Entscheide, um die es ging, reichten tiefer. Bei dem Streit um das Verhältnis von Glaube und Überlieferung waren Grundfragen der rechten Auslegung und Aneignung des christlichen Glaubens im Spiel, deren kirchentrennende Wirkung durch bloßes historisches Verstehen nicht zu überwinden ist. 

First of all, it is important to proceed with careful historical work. The aim is to gain a fair picture of the Reformer as well as of the entire epoch of the Reformation and the persons working in it through unbiased research guided solely by the search for truth. Where there is guilt, it must be acknowledged, no matter which side it hits; where polemics have distorted the view, it must be corrected, again regardless of which side it is. In doing so, we cannot be guided by the intention of setting ourselves up as judges of history, but the goal must only be to recognize better and thus to become more capable of truth (botschaft von johannes paul ii. an kard. johannes willebrands, präsident des sekretariats für die einheit der christen, 1983, Google English translation).

Original text: Zunächst ist das Fortgehen sorgfältiger historischer Arbeit wichtig. Es geht darum, durch unvoreingenommene, allein von der Suche nach Wahrheit geleitete Forschung ein gerechtes Bild des Reformators wie der ganzen Epoche der Reformation und der in ihr wirkenden Personen zu gewinnen. Wo Schuld ist, muß sie anerkannt werden, gleich welche Seite sie trifft; wo Polemik die Sicht verzerrt hat, muß sie richtiggestellt werden, wiederum unabhängig davon, um welche Seite es sich handelt. Dabei kann uns nicht die Absicht leiten, uns zu Richtern der Geschichte aufzuwerfen, sondern das Ziel darf einzig sein, besser zu erkennen und damit wahrheitsfähiger zu werden.  

Pope John Paul II didn't view Martin Luther as still excommunicated. He stated: "According to Roman Catholic doctrine, any excommunication expires with the person's death. It only applies during a person's lifetime." This appears to be an inference made from the Code of Canon Law that states excommunication is a medical penalty enacted upon someone who is living (Code of Canon Law, can. 1312). 

In a letter from October 31, 1983, Pope John Paul II also wrote of the "profound religiousness of Luther who, with burning passion, was driven by the examination of eternal salvation."

Twenty-First Century

Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) (2005-2013) 

 “How do I receive the grace of God?”: this question struck him in the heart and lay at the foundation of all his theological searching and inner struggle. For Luther theology was no mere academic pursuit, but the struggle for oneself, which in turn was a struggle for and with God. “How do I receive the grace of God?” The fact that this question was the driving force of his whole life never ceases to make a deep impression on me... The question: what is God’s position towards me, where do I stand before God? – Luther’s burning question must once more, doubtless in a new form, become our question too, not an academic question, but a real one. In my view, this is the first summons we should attend to in our encounter with Martin Luther. (Meeting with the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany Friday, 23 September 2011).
Luther’s thinking, his whole spirituality, was thoroughly Christocentric: “What promotes Christ’s cause” was for Luther the decisive hermeneutical criterion for the exegesis of sacred Scripture. This presupposes, however, that Christ is at the heart of our spirituality and that love for him, living in communion with him, is what guides our life  (Meeting with the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany Friday, 23 September 2011).

It was the error of the Reformation period that for the most part we could only see what divided us and we failed to grasp existentially what we have in common in terms of the great deposit of sacred Scripture and the early Christian creeds. For me, the great ecumenical step forward of recent decades is that we have become aware of all this common ground, that we acknowledge it as we pray and sing together, as we make our joint commitment to the Christian ethos in our dealings with the world, as we bear common witness to the God of Jesus Christ in this world as our inalienable, shared foundation (Meeting with the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany Friday, 23 September 2011).

 ...I firmly hoped for an ecumenical experience in Erfurt, for it was in this very city that Martin Luther entered the Augustinian community and was ordained a priest. I was therefore deeply cheered by the meeting with the members of the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany and by the ecumenical event in the former Augustinian Convent. It was a cordial meeting which, in dialogue and prayer, brought us more deeply to Christ. We saw once again how important our common witness to faith in Jesus Christ is in today’s world, which all too often takes no notice of God or is not interested in him (General Audience, St. Peter's Square, Wednesday, 28 September 2011).

Pope Francis (2013-2025)

I think that Martin Luther’s intentions were not mistaken; he was a reformer. Perhaps some of his methods were not right, although at that time, if you read Pastor’s history, for example – Pastor was a German Lutheran who experienced a conversion when he studied the facts of that period; he became a Catholic – we see that the Church was not exactly a model to emulate. There was corruption and worldliness in the Church; there was attachment to money and power. That was the basis of his protest. He was also intelligent, and he went ahead, justifying his reasons for it. Nowadays, Lutherans and Catholics, and all Protestants, are in agreement on the doctrine of justification: on this very important point he was not mistaken. He offered a “remedy” for the Church, and then this remedy rigidified in a state of affairs, a discipline, a way of believing, a way of acting, a mode of liturgy.  (In Flight Press Conference of His Holiness Pope Francis from Armedia to Rome, Sunday, 26 June 2016).

 Pope Francis Celebrates the Reformation with a Martin Luther Statue? 

One of the most bizarre official Roman Catholic reclassifications of Martin Luther happened in 2016. Bonafide pictures circulated online showing Pope Francis standing next to the Vatican's statue of Martin Luther. Some reports say the Pope also received the gift of a jumbo edition of the Ninety-Five Theses. Luther's statue appears to be holding the New Testament. Here's an excerpt from the Pope's address:

Jesus reminds us: “Apart from me, you can do nothing” (v. 5). He is the one who sustains us and spurs us on to find ways to make our unity ever more visible. Certainly, our separation has been an immense source of suffering and misunderstanding, yet it has also led us to recognize honestly that without him we can do nothing; in this way it has enabled us to understand better some aspects of our faith. With gratitude we acknowledge that the Reformation helped give greater centrality to sacred Scripture in the Church’s life. Through shared hearing of the word of God in the Scriptures, important steps forward have been taken in the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation, whose fiftieth anniversary we are presently celebrating. Let us ask the Lord that his word may keep us united, for it is a source of nourishment and life; without its inspiration we can do nothing.

The spiritual experience of Martin Luther challenges us to remember that apart from God we can do nothing. “How can I get a propitious God?” This is the question that haunted Luther. In effect, the question of a just relationship with God is the decisive question for our lives. As we know, Luther encountered that propitious God in the Good News of Jesus, incarnate, dead and risen. With the concept “by grace alone”, he reminds us that God always takes the initiative, prior to any human response, even as he seeks to awaken that response. The doctrine of justification thus expresses the essence of human existence before God.

Conclusion
This excursion into papal comments is intended to demonstrate the significant differences in interacting with Roman Catholics considering Protestants to be separated brethren and those that think Protestants are headed toward eternal damnation. Both types of Roman Catholics online, but the latter category presents itself as an overwhelming expansive swarm. If you're conversing with a member of the swarm, challenge them to be transparent as to which pope they agree with:

Which private interpretive opinion of Roman Catholicism do you hold

Also ask: Why is your opinion of Martin Luther, the Reformation, and Protestants more authoritative or meaningful than a pope?

 The founder of the popular North American pop-apologetics website Catholic Answers commented on the statements of Pope Francis above. Compare and contrast Keating's Reformation-hostile remarks to those of Pope Francis:  

I see nothing to celebrate in the Protestant Reformation. It was the greatest disaster the West suffered over the last millennium. It brought theological confusion, political turmoil, and decades of war. The religious wars of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries killed about three percent of the world’s population, the same proportion that died in World War II. The religious wars would not have occurred had the Reformation not occurred.

Keating's rhetoric finds many noisy allies in cyberspace. For instance, just recently a defender of Rome called me a "slimy Anti-Christ heretic." Another comment stated, "death to prots" (though hours later this comment was edited out). This is not official Roman Catholic language post-Vatican II! For those of you involved in online Reformation dialogs, the overwhelming majority of noisy Roman Catholics have no idea that the way the papacy understood Luther in the sixteenth century is not the way the papacy understands him currently. I haven't found many that care or see it as a dilemma. They have no interest in parsing out the extreme conflicting opinions of the Papacy. 


Addendum #1: Old School Roman Catholics vs. New School Ecumenism

In interacting with Rome's defenders, I have come across more than a few people that rejects the ecumenically driven Vatican II type of authority and ecumenism of the modern papacy. They seem flatly against the view that Protestants are separated brethren and viewing Martin Luther favorably. These cyber-defenders of Rome cling to an older interpretation of the papacy that was hostile to Protestants and consider them lost heretics. For instance, take a look at this Roman Catholic work from the nineteenth century:

Q. Does the Lord make use of apostate Catholics, such as Martin Luther, Calvin, John Knox, Henry VIII., King of England, to reform the manners of the people?

A. The thought is absurd. The lives of those men were evil, and it is only the devil that makes use of them to pervert the people still more. The Lord makes use of His saints, such as a St. Francis of Assisium, a St. Dominick, a St. Ignatius, a St. Alphonsus, to convert the people and reform their evil manners by explaining to them the truths of faith, the commandments, and the necessity of receiving the sacraments with proper dispositions, and by setting them in their own lives the loftiest example of faith, purity, and all Christian virtues.

Q. Are there any other reasons to show that heretics, or Protestants who die out of the Roman Catholic Church, are not saved?

A. There are several. They cannot be saved, because

1. They have no divine faith.
2. They make a liar of Jesus Christ, of the Holy Ghost, and of the Apostles.
3. They have no faith in Christ.
4. They fell away from the true Church of Christ.
5. They are too proud to submit to the Pope, the Vicar of Christ.
6. They cannot perform any good works whereby they can obtain heaven.
7. They do not receive the Body and Blood of Christ.
8. They die in their sins.
9. They ridicule and blaspheme the Mother of God and His saints.
10. They slander the spouse of Jesus Christ —:the Catholic Church.

Q. What is the act of faith of a Protestant?

A. O my God, I believe nothing except what my own private judgment tells me to believe; therefore I believe that I can interpret Thy written word—the Holy Scriptures —as I choose. I believe that the Pope is anti-Christ; that any man can be saved, provided he is an honest man; I believe that faith alone is sufficient for salvation; that good works, and works of penance, and the confession of sins are not necessary, etc.

Q. Have Protestants any faith in Christ?

A. They never had.

Q. Why not?

A. Because there never lived such a Christ as they imagine and believe in.

Q. In what kind of a Christ do they believe?

A. In such a one of whom they can make a liar, with impunity, whose doctrine they can interpret as they please, and who does not care about what a man believes, provided he be an honest man before the public.

Q. Will such a faith in such a Christ save Protestants?

A. No sensible man will assert such an absurdity.

 

Addendum #2: The Roman Catholic Perspective of Martin Luther

One of my earliest online projects was tracing Roman Catholic views of Martin Luther through the centuries (2003). Back then, I stumbled upon the change from their harsh polemic to kind evaluation... seemingly by accident!  The information in the links below was primarily gathered from my deep dives in the library at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. 

The Roman Catholic Perspective of Martin Luther (Part One)


To explain this as simply as possible: Roman Catholic scholarship was generally hostile to Martin Luther up until the early twentieth century. Then, there was a shift toward from destructive criticism of Luther to respectful encounter. This Roman Catholic scholarship eventually filtered into the papacy. 

It seems to me that while the harsh polemic was avoided by Roman Catholic scholarship in the twentieth century, it did not filter down that well to the masses. Then, the Internet hit. The old polemic was revived and given new life in the twenty-first century by anyone with an online dial-up connection! If you're interacting with Roman Catholicism on Martin Luther, you'll benefit greatly by understanding this flow of their history.


Addendum #3: Video- History of Roman Catholic Treatments of Martin Luther
In February 2024 I was invited to do a YouTube interview on the History of Roman Catholic Treatments of Martin Luther for Javier Perdomo's channel. I provided a cursory trace of Roman Catholic opinions on Martin Luther through the centuries. For those of you interested in the issues between Protestants and Roman Catholics, I highly recommend Javier Perdomo's channel!