Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did Martin Luther believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary? (Tipping R.C. Straw men)
Beggars All ^ | September 30, 2010

Posted on 11/20/2013 7:14:42 AM PST by Gamecock

Did Martin Luther believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary? According to Patrick Madrid and Taylor Marshall, he did. Madrid says this question will "likely raise a few eyebrows, pique a few sensitivities, and elicit a few comments around Christian blogdom, from both sides of the Tiber." It appears Madrid thinks Taylor Marshall posted some new controversial tidbit of historical research finally making its way to the Internet. Actually, Marshall's alleged information has been surfing around for over ten years, cut, pasted, and rehashed- taken from one specific Romanist layman with a blog.

Contrary to Marshall's blog entry, it is not a clear cut case as to what Luther's view was. Romanists typically ignore anything about Mary that doesn't support Romanist Mariology. The same goes for Luther's Mariology: when Romanists find a Luther tidbit about Mary that seems to support Mariolatry, they run with it, even if other evidence contradicts the evidence they're using. So, here's a closer look at Taylor Marshall's facts about Luther and the immaculate conception.


1.The eminent Lutheran scholar Arthur Carl Piepkorn

The first tidbit used by Marshall is that "The eminent Lutheran scholar Arthur Carl Piepkorn (1907-73) has also confirmed that Luther believed in the Immaculate Conception even as a Protestant." No quote, research finding, or documentation from Piepkorn are presented by either Marshall or Madrid. That doesn't surprise me, because the only material from Piepkorn on this subject that I know of comes from The Church: Selected Writings of Arthur Carl Piepkorn, (New York: ALPB Books, 1993). This is typically the source Romanists use.

Piepkorn makes a comment in passing on page 275, leaving the discussion at Luther “seems” to have had a lifelong belief in the Immaculate Conception. He neither discusses the content of Luther’s opinion, nor does he offer any indication if the 1854 dogma is in question. Then on page 289 Piepkorn states:

Yet three years before his death [Luther] was still affirming in print the opinion that he had worked out in detail with considerable theological ingenuity twenty five years earlier [#12], namely that through the merits of her Son -to-be the Blessed Virgin was marvelously preserved from the taint of sin from the first moment of her existence as a human being [#13].

footnote #12. Sermon on the Gospel for the Feast of the Conception of the B.V.M. (1517), Weimar edition 17/2, 288.

footnote #13. Vom Schem Hamphoras und vom Geschlect Christi, 1543, Weimar edition, 53,640. compare for the year 1553, 37, 231, where he describes the B.V.M. as an sund (i.e. ohne Sünde, "without sin").


Footnote #12 is actually an error. The sermon Piepkorn's referenced was preached in 1527, and begins on page 280 in WA 17.2. This sermon will be discussed below in point #2, because later printed copies of the sermon (from Luther's lifetime) delete the sole passing comment to Mary's immaculate conception. The error makes Piepkorn's "twenty five year" comment inaccurate. That is, the sermon he based his comment on was actually preached ten years later.

Footnote #13 refers to one of Luther's later anti-Jewish writings, not a treatise on Mariology. Luther does not launch into any full discussion of Mary's Immaculate Conception. Luther does state, only in passing that it was necessary for Mary to be a young holy virgin freed of original sin and cleansed by the Holy Ghost to be the mother of Jesus Christ. This statement comes after argumentation for Mary's perpetual virginity. What the statement from Luther doesn't say, one way or the other, is if Mary lived a completely sinless life. I've documented a number of times in which Luther says the cleansing of Mary by the Holy Spirit happened at the conception of Christ, not at Mary's conception.

Piepkorn presents no argumentation or analysis. Why would Piepkorn takes vague statements and put forth strong conclusions? I can only speculate, but Piepkorn had interest in ecumenical dialog with Rome. He was involved for multiple years with Lutheran-Catholic dialogue. Catholic scholar Raymond Brown praised Piepkorn and commented that it would be preposterous to doubt the validity of his priestly orders. Piepkorn's romance with Rome seems to have molded his interpretation of Luther's Mariology.


2. On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God, 1527


The next tidbit offered by Marshall is the following Luther quote:

"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.

The sermon this quote was taken from is not included in the English edition of Luther’s Works, and to my knowledge, the complete sermon has not been translated into English. This quote made its way into a cyber space when a Romanist about 10 years ago began posting it after he took it from Roman Catholic historian Hartmann Grisar's book, Luther Vol. IV (St Louis: B. Herder, 1913). Grisar uses this quote, but what my Romanist friends typically leave out is his analysis:

The sermon was taken down in notes and published with Luther’s approval. The same statements concerning the Immaculate Conception still remain in a printed edition published in 1529, but in later editions which appeared during Luther’s lifetime they disappear.

The reason for their disappearance is that as Luther’s Christocentric theology developed, aspects of Luther’s Mariology were abandoned. Grisar also recognizes the development in Luther's theology. In regards to the Luther quote in question, Grisar says (from a Roman Catholic perspective):

As Luther’s intellectual and ethical development progressed we cannot naturally expect the sublime picture of the pure Mother of God, the type of virginity, of the spirit of sacrifice and of sanctity to furnish any great attraction for him, and as a matter of fact such statements as the above are no longer met with in his later works.

The most one can conclude from this Luther quote is that Luther held to some form of Mary's sinlessness in 1527. According to Grisar, the comment was stricken from the sermon, and Luther abandoned his earlier view.

3. Martin Luther's Little Prayer Book, 1522

Marshall then uses another Luther quote to prove his case:

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

"Martin Luther's Little Prayer Book" refers to the Personal Prayer Book of 1522. Here Luther does treat the subject of Mary. He states, "In the first place, 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" (LW 43:39).

This quote indeed appears to treat Mary as entirely sinless. This statement was made in 1522. If Grisar is correct, Luther's later view does not reflect such sentiment. Even in this early Reformation writing, Luther began changing the emphasis on Mary, and de-emphasizing the importance of her attributes:

“Take note of this: no one should put his trust or confidence in the Mother of God or in her merits, for such trust is worthy of God alone and is the lofty service due only to him. Rather praise and thank God through Mary and the grace given her. Laud and love her simply as the one who, without merit, obtained such blessings from God, sheerly out of his mercy, as she herself testifies in the Magnificat.”

“Therefore we should make the Hail Mary neither a prayer nor an invocation because it is improper to interpret the words beyond what they mean in themselves and beyond the meaning given them by the Holy Spirit.”

“…her giving birth is blessed in that it was spared the curse upon all children of Eve who are conceived in sin and born to deserve death and damnation. Only the fruit of her body is blessed, and through this birth we are all blessed.”

“…in the present no one speaks evil of this Mother and her Fruit as much as those who bless her with many rosaries and constantly mouth the Hail Mary. These, more than any others, speak evil against Christ’s word and faith in the worst way.

“Therefore, notice that this Mother and her Fruit are blessed in a twofold way—bodily and spiritually. Bodily with lips and the words of the Hail Mary; such persons blaspheme and speak evil of her most dangerously. And spiritually [one blesses her] in one’s heart by praise and benediction for her child, Christ—for all his words, deeds, and sufferings. And no one does this except he who has the true Christian faith because without such faith no heart is good but is by nature stuffed full of evil speech and blasphemy against God and all his saints.”


It makes a lot of sense that by 1530 or so, Luther's views on Mary would shift even more away from Romanism.


Luther's view?
Luther's later view appears to be that at Christ's conception the Holy Spirit sanctified Mary so that the child would be born with non-sinful flesh and blood. For an example of Luther's argumentation, see: Luther and the Immaculate Conception? The 1540 Disputation On the Divinity and Humanity of Christ.

There are many other statements about Mary from Luther Romanists ignore. Most of these are post-1527.

In this sermon Luther states, " although she had been sanctified by the Holy Spirit; yet he permitted her at times to err, even in the important matters of faith." He says also:

Be they called holy, learned, fathers, councils, or any other name, even though they were Mary, Joseph and all the saints it does not follow that they could not have erred and made mistakes. For here you learn that the mother of Christ though she possessed great intelligence and enlightenment, showed great ignorance in that she did not know where to find Christ, and in consequence was censured by him because she did not know what she should have known. If she failed and through her ignorance was brought to such anxiety and sorrow that she thought she had lost Christ, is it a wonder that other saints should often have erred and stumbled, when they followed their own notions, without the guidance of Scripture, or put their own notions into Scripture.

See also selections from this blog entry, documenting the same position from Luther.

Rather than discussing Mary’s sinlessness, Luther's later writings insist Christ’s sinlessness was due entirely to the miraculous work of the Holy Spirit during conception. In 1532 he preached:

Mother Mary, like us, was born in sin of sinful parents, but the Holy Spirit covered her, sanctified and purified her so that this child was born of flesh and blood, but not with sinful flesh and blood. The Holy Spirit permitted the Virgin Mary to remain a true, natural human being of flesh and blood, just as we. However, he warded off sin from her flesh and blood so that she became the mother of a pure child, not poisoned by sin as we are…For in that moment when she conceived, she was a holy mother filled with the Holy Spirit and her fruit is a holy pure fruit, at once God and truly man, in one person [Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, Vol. 3, ed. John Nicholas Lenker. ( Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996), 291].

In 1534 Luther explained that Christ was “born of a young maiden, as you and I are born of our mothers. The only difference is that the Holy Spirit engineered this conception and birth, while in contrast we mortals are conceived and born in sin.”[Ibid., 294.]. As Jaroslov Pelikan has noted, Mary functioned in Luther’s theology as “the guarantee of the reality of the incarnation and of the human nature of Christ.” With the doctrine of the immaculate conception, one sees a clear change in Luther’s thought. The theologian, who had at one time praised both mother and child for their purity, now praised only the Son.

Conclusion
This is only a brief look at a subject I've spent considerable time on over the years. I would never be dogmatic (for lack of a better word), but I've never found any conclusive quotes from Luther (with a context!) after 1527 that reflect his earlier position.

There's one Romanist who thinks simply doing a scholarly head count (which scholars think Luther believed in the immaculate conception, and which do not) is the means of determining Luther's view. This isn't my way of determining truth. I like to look at quotes and look up contexts, especially on an issue that has some uncertainty about it. Simply consider the errors I located in Piepkorn's view detailed here, and also in this previous entry. Those who think simply counting heads determines truth are typically those who really don't care about the truth.

I'm sure Patrick Madrid could care less. I don't know anything about Taylor Marshall- perhaps he's a guy interested in history and truth and will revise his blog entry. Marshall concludes his article stating,

Far be it from me to approve of Luther. I only list these quotes to show how far Protestantism has come from it's quasi-Catholic origin. If only Lutherans would return to this single doctrine of their founder; how quickly our Lady would turn them into true Catholics! Queen conceived without original sin, pray for us!

Even if Martin Luther believed in Mary's immaculate conception, the Reformation does not suffer loss. Neither myself nor the Lutheran church considers Luther to be an infallible source of either interpretation or revelation. However, my Romanist friends need to do a little better at proving Luther believed in the immaculate conception of Mary.



TOPICS: Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant
KEYWORDS: immaculatemary
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-198 next last

1 posted on 11/20/2013 7:14:42 AM PST by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; metmom

Another Roman Catholic Straw Man argument that has been trotted out lately.

Here is the rest of the story.


2 posted on 11/20/2013 7:16:23 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

I would like to suggest that all this finger pointing between religious groups is part of an organized effort to get us fighting each other.

This is getting silly!


3 posted on 11/20/2013 7:20:08 AM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

No offense, but I couldn’t care less if ML believed in the immaculate conception. I only care what God’s letter to us (the Bible) says.


4 posted on 11/20/2013 7:22:09 AM PST by Shimmer1 (don 't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zathras

Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God? That he died for our sins and that he is the only path to salvation?

If yes then we’re pretty much on the same side and can have a discussion on the minor details.


5 posted on 11/20/2013 7:22:32 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

The scripture says “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God”, not “all but Mary have sinned...”.


6 posted on 11/20/2013 7:23:06 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shimmer1; Mrs. Don-o

Borrowing this from Mrs. Don-o

As I always tell my RCIA students, Scripture doesn’t say, “For God so loved the world, He sent a book.”


7 posted on 11/20/2013 7:24:22 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Even if Martin Luther believed in Mary’s immaculate conception, the Reformation does not suffer loss. Neither myself nor the Lutheran church considers Luther to be an infallible source of either interpretation or revelation.
____________________________________________________________________

Exactly, that is why God left us His precious word, to be Bereans and search the scripture daily.


8 posted on 11/20/2013 7:27:02 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

If that is the case nor did he send “sacred tradition.”


9 posted on 11/20/2013 7:28:27 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
It must be a hard way to go through life -- to identify oneself, to revolve one's life around, not what one IS, but what one ISN'T.

Very negative way of living -- akin to atheism, I shouldn't wonder.

10 posted on 11/20/2013 7:29:09 AM PST by Wyrd bi ful ard (Gone Galt, 11/07/12----No king but Christ! Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

BINGO!


11 posted on 11/20/2013 7:29:37 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

According to our Roman Catholic FRiends all doesn’t mean all.


12 posted on 11/20/2013 7:30:26 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Did I ask you to analyze my personal life?
I did ask you to consider if all this talk is designed to get us fighting each other.

I guess you just answered my question.
Just in case you missed it...the answer is YES.


13 posted on 11/20/2013 7:32:03 AM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

“Jesus came upon a small crowd who had surrounded a young woman they believed to be an adulteress. They were preparing to stone her to death.

To calm the situation, Jesus said: “Whoever is without sin among you, let them cast the first stone.”

Suddenly, a woman at the back of the crowd picked up a huge rock and lobbed it at the young woman, scoring a direct hit on her head. The unfortunate young lady collapsed dead on the spot.

Jesus looked over towards the lady and said: “Mom! You stay out of this!”


14 posted on 11/20/2013 7:32:10 AM PST by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.

Jesus did come and set us free and His word endures forever, it is good to read the bible.


15 posted on 11/20/2013 7:32:22 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Check Patrick Madrid on the subject. He disagrees with your article, BTW.


16 posted on 11/20/2013 7:32:51 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

So is that piece of scripture telling us that Gabriel - the angel of the Annunciation - was a fallen angel?

After all the scripture says “all have sinned.” It doesn’t say “all but Gabriel have sinned”.

Using the Bible in an arid and reductive manner quickly leads you into absurdities.


17 posted on 11/20/2013 7:33:41 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

Holy Scripture AND Holy Tradition.

What did the apostles say about Mary? It’s not all in Scripture. Read the Early Church Fathers.


18 posted on 11/20/2013 7:35:55 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Zathras

Sorry I wasn’t asking you personally. I was making a general comment. my apologies.


19 posted on 11/20/2013 7:36:40 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd

I know how I am.

I was chosen before “the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love” (eph 1:4)

Who are you? Have you accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior?


20 posted on 11/20/2013 7:39:35 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Proving what?

Absolutely nothing.

21 posted on 11/20/2013 7:40:52 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra; JimRed

Arguing in the absurd.

Scripture is aimed at men, not at the Heavenly beings.


22 posted on 11/20/2013 7:42:33 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

No worries mate, I’ve done the same thing. :-)
I’m just trying to get people to think carefully about what is going on.

BTW, yes I am a Christian but I spent enough time in Israel to see how much Christians fighting Christians has damaged our relationship with our Israeli friends.

If you get the chance, go there. It will change your life.


23 posted on 11/20/2013 7:42:39 AM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

BUMP!


24 posted on 11/20/2013 7:43:30 AM PST by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
As I always tell my RCIA students, Scripture doesn’t say, “For God so loved the world, He sent a book.”

Except that as it is Written John 1:1 In the beginning (that means Genesis) was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ........

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Why Mary is not named anywhere in the volume of the book as being 'begotten'. She to fulfill the prophecy came from the tribe of Judah, the king line and the tribe of Levi, the priest line. There were 12 tribes of Israel, each are named.

25 posted on 11/20/2013 7:43:34 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Actually, if Luther held simultaneously held the understanding Mary’s purity inherited from the Church before the division of East and West and the Augustinian understanding of Original Sin (he certainly embraced the latter, though not in such a big way a Calvin), Luther would (like the Latin church) have been stuck believing something like the later-formulated Latin doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the BVM.

We Orthodox object to the Immaculate Conception because we see it as fixing a non-existent problem: Augustine’s view of the Fall and its effects are too extreme (look up a description of the Orthodox doctrine of Ancestral Sin to see what we hold to be the truth of the matter), and so we have no problem with the classical understanding of Mary’s purity and virtue without a jury-rigged fix to make sense of it in the context of Blessed Augustine’s speculations.


26 posted on 11/20/2013 7:44:46 AM PST by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Gamecock
What did the apostles say about Mary? It’s not all in Scripture. Read the Early Church Fathers.

Was every single thing that the apostles said, and every single word written about them by later scribes, considered by your church to be Holy-Spirit-inspired, inerrant and infallible?

27 posted on 11/20/2013 7:48:58 AM PST by Alex Murphy ("the defacto Leader of the FR Calvinist Protestant Brigades")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Tradition? Do you remember the Pharisees they put tradition above truth. The bible says very little about Mary, we know she looked to Christ for her salvation, she was a servant of the God most high. She was a sinner like us. This is what scripture tells us. I do understand the mental gymnastics one goes through to validate this belief.


28 posted on 11/20/2013 7:50:02 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

One point that is always good to remember: even if Luther did believe this, it makes no difference to Protestants. Luther wasn’t the “Pope of the Protestants”, pronouncing doctrine that we all follow. He could believe whatever he wanted about Mary, but if he could not support it with Biblical evidence, then nobody has any compulsion to join him in his belief.


29 posted on 11/20/2013 7:50:40 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Should have been I don’t understand


30 posted on 11/20/2013 7:52:17 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
So when Scripture mentions the devil, it's not true?

Because its not aimed at him, but at men?

Reductio ad absurdum is an authentic logical test. If your use of scripture crashes into it then there is something wrong with your use of scripture.

31 posted on 11/20/2013 7:53:21 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
"I was chosen before “the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love” (eph 1:4)"

It strikes me, as you are interpreting that verse, that it is not in agreement with Romans 3:23, already cited in this thread, "for all men have sinned..."

Additionally, being chosen, as you appear to be interpreting it, does not automatically equal staying chosen.

32 posted on 11/20/2013 7:53:29 AM PST by Wyrd bi ful ard (Gone Galt, 11/07/12----No king but Christ! Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Zathras

I think the point you are missing is that these disputes exist. They won’t go away simply because you prefer not to talk about them. If we are ever to achieve reconciliation amongst all the churches, as Christ surely would want, then we are going to have to settle some disagreements, which you cannot do by ignoring them.


33 posted on 11/20/2013 7:54:20 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JimRed
This is a more complicated verse that first meets the eye. Jesus never sinned of course -- yet He was True God and True Man, possessing full Humanity.

In that scripture passage you refer to, it was being stated that Jews are not above gentiles, as we are all justified by faith alone.

34 posted on 11/20/2013 7:55:59 AM PST by Wyrd bi ful ard (Gone Galt, 11/07/12----No king but Christ! Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
Did you read the article?
Even if Martin Luther believed in Mary's immaculate conception, the Reformation does not suffer loss. Neither myself nor the Lutheran church considers Luther to be an infallible source of either interpretation or revelation. However, my Romanist friends need to do a little better at proving Luther believed in the immaculate conception of Mary.

The point is the Roman Catholics here, and out in the real world, think they are playing "gotcha" with supposed Luther quotes. Most of the are wretched out of context. The point of my posting this article is to refute one of their straw men.

35 posted on 11/20/2013 7:56:10 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

Tradition is not talking about the Jewish law. The definition of Holy Tradition is truth that was handed down one person to another, face to face.

You are confusing the definitions of tradition.


36 posted on 11/20/2013 7:58:12 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Not all of it. You know that.


37 posted on 11/20/2013 7:58:57 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Not all of it. You know that, don’t you?


38 posted on 11/20/2013 7:59:13 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd

No problems here.

I was made without blame through Jesus.

Plus He who has begun a good work in [me] will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.


39 posted on 11/20/2013 7:59:56 AM PST by Gamecock (If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. (M.S.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Read from Luke 1: 26 onward.


40 posted on 11/20/2013 8:00:16 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
"I was made without blame through Jesus."

Oh, just like Mary eh?

41 posted on 11/20/2013 8:01:08 AM PST by Wyrd bi ful ard (Gone Galt, 11/07/12----No king but Christ! Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: JimRed
Remember: the words of the Angel Gabriel to Mary - as given by scripture - were
Chaire, Kecharitomene

“Hail, Full of Grace”.

The words of the Archangel show that Mary was full of grace – that she was without sin.

42 posted on 11/20/2013 8:06:11 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

That is sort of silly, IMO.

Gabriel was not human. Gabriel was an angel.


43 posted on 11/20/2013 8:06:54 AM PST by chesley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Shimmer1
No offense, but I couldn’t care less if ML believed in the immaculate conception. I only care what God’s letter to us (the Bible) says.

I hear you. it's interesting how the followers of man seem to think that EVERYONE does as they do.

It is beyond their comprehension that not everyone cares what others think and that Luther is not the head of anything or anyone.

The projection is astounding.

44 posted on 11/20/2013 8:08:47 AM PST by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

For God so loved the world that he did not send a committee.

Even if it is called the magisterium.


45 posted on 11/20/2013 8:09:45 AM PST by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

the devil sinned. Humanity sinned.

The difference is, God sent Christ to redeem Mankind. Satan and his angels were not given the opportunity.

Your arguments are trivial.


46 posted on 11/20/2013 8:09:52 AM PST by chesley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Why, exactly, do we want to achieve reconciliation?

Not by giving up the Truth, we don’t.


47 posted on 11/20/2013 8:11:00 AM PST by chesley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Nice little digs you manage to squeeze in. Unfortunately, from my perspective reading your comment, the ignorance is astounding.
48 posted on 11/20/2013 8:11:23 AM PST by Wyrd bi ful ard (Gone Galt, 11/07/12----No king but Christ! Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd
It must be a hard way to go through life -- to identify oneself, to revolve one's life around, not what one IS, but what one ISN'T.

Very negative way of living -- akin to atheism, I shouldn't wonder.

That's one of the things that makes Catholicism so hard.

Having my identity IN Christ is all I need.

Galatians 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

49 posted on 11/20/2013 8:11:52 AM PST by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Snort! And I know His son better through this book. More Jesus, less Martin Luther


50 posted on 11/20/2013 8:12:16 AM PST by Shimmer1 (don 't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-198 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson