Why do Catholics still believe in Catholicism after Martin Luther's 95 thesis?

Question

I'm lokking for a reasonable answer, i'm not meaning to Catholic bash.

Looking for imformed Catholics to answer.

Answer 1

I will give you my take, for what its worth (since you are soliciting Roman Catholic Answers and I myself am not a Roman Catholic.)

The intent of the 95 Theses was not to disband or deconstruct the Roman Catholic Church, but to engage in a discussion about what Luther saw as errors being taught or allowed in his time. Obviously, Martin Luther was excommunicated and the only debate that took place was with the Pope's theologian vs. Luther and the reformers. The Roman Catholic Church has made reforms and changes (probably not to the extent that others would like) over the years. While your question is probably honest, it does imply that the 95 Theses draws an end to the institution of the Roman Catholic Church, which it does not. I think you see this in the Protestant view of history. Some think that Roman Catholicism was replaced by Lutheranism, Lutheranism replaced by Calvinism, Calvinism replaced by Arminianism... and so on. This emphasis on current trends in history is particularly popular with modern evangelicals and the post modernists. Obviously, there is still a Luther Church and a Roman Catholic Church today that we can trace through history. Or there is a tendency to think that Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism are the antithesis of each other, like Calvinism and Arminianism. This is not true.

There is a famous saying, "Abusus non tollit, sed confirmat substantiam." Which means "Abuse does not destroy the essence but confirms it," which is typically followed by Luther's quote, "for gold is not the less gold though a harlot wear it in sin and shame." Unfortunately, for too long people have pointed their finger at the Roman Catholic Church and proclaimed it beyond repair, because it does not meet their standards of having reformed enough. This is especially true in our common era. I tend to look on it as the old saying, “You can’t throw out the baby with the bath water.”


dwboi/Dilettant-
I just read your answer. I do have to say that you don't know much about what you speak of.

I gather you have never been a member of a group that has strayed or left its mission and found yourself in a position of having to decide weather to stay and work internally in the group or leave. I have been in this unique position. While some cases you can remain a member of the group and work for positive changes and reforms. The problem comes in when the group doesn’t want to change, or worse turns on you for suggesting that it wants to change. I would like to point out that Martin Luther was excommunicated by Pope Leo X in 1521 by the Papal Bull Decet Romanum Pontificem. It is also note worthy to point out that it wasn’t until the end of the Diet of Augsburg in the 1530’s that it became evident to the Lutheran reformers that things were not going to be reconciled (because the Emperor refused to let the Apology of the Augsburg Confession be presented.) This coupled with the observation of Luther and the Lutheran reformers of the effects of the people being cut off from churchly institutions that it became evident that they would need to start establishing churchly institutions. Your premise that if Martin Luther had just held on, worked with the system and not broken from the Roman Catholic Church, that he would been better off is laughable. Remember, we were excommunicated; we never left the Catholic faith.
The “Five Solas” of the reformation were Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura, Solus Christus, and Soli Deo Gloria. But what is alarming is the fact that you totally don’t understand the Sola’s of the Reformation. The theological concept of “Sola Scriptura” is not defined as the idea of Faith alone and Scripture alone get you into heaven. You totally left out “Sola Gratia” which really doesn’t shock me, but it hugely important. That it is “Grace Alone.” You pit Good works against Justification by Faith, which is totally unscriptural. The five solas do not diminish the biblical view good works and make it unnecessary. To be honest, you can not separate the two in the Christian life. But then again, I can understand why people loose their mind when they grapple with this doctrine. Deep down in side, no matter what the Bible tells people, they still want to participate in their Justification. That is why we proclaim, that we are justified by Grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
Romans 3
But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

Also, who are you to proclaim that the Lutheran church has a bad reputation to live up to? Again, you look at the Lutheran Church through your narrow Roman Catholic view. Just because we are “Lutheran” does not mean that we have accept all beliefs, views and writings of Martin Luther. See, the Lutheran Church is not bound to the same confines that the Roman Catholic Church is in this regard to “tradition.” Look, I and 99.99% of Lutherans do not agree with Luther’s late life view on the Jews.

“During the earlier years of his ministry he wrote a pamphlet, ‘That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew,’ in which he sympathized with the Jews for the way they had been treated by Christians. He urged that the gospel be preached to them. Martin Luther did not hate the Jews. He hated the fact that the Jews rejected their Messiah, Jesus, and the good news of the salvation he won for all people. It is, however, a sad fact that late in life (1537) he wrote a hateful book in which he called for harsh treatment of the Jews: ‘On the Jews and Their Lies.’ Lutherans regret that Martin Luther wrote that book. In his preface to that writing, however, Luther wrote: ‘We must indeed with prayer and the fear of God before our eyes exercise a keen compassion towards them and seek to save some of them from the flames. Avenge ourselves we dare not.’ Luther's attitude toward the Jews was less negative than that of two famous contemporaries, the humanist Erasmus of Rotterdam and the Roman Catholic saint, Thomas More. He was not an anti-Semite in the modern sense of that word.”
This topic has been written on extensively by Lutheran writers like Neelak Tjernagel and Uwe Siemon-Netto. It is pretty much an established fact that the Lutheran Church does not hold Luther’s view on this subject.
What I find interesting is your apparent lack of knowledge of the Roman Catholic view during the Middle and Late ages. To be honest, a lot of people say that Luther maintained the Official Church party line. Before the Reformation, atrocities in Spain, Italy, France and England were rampant among the Catholic Monarchies. Yet, the only thing you can point to is a book written by Martin Luther? Laughable. You then go on to demonize the Lutheran churches in Germany and Scandinavia, yet totally disregard the participation of the Roman Catholic Church in government through out most of Europe’s history? You can’t be for real. I think this is the first (and I hope the last time I say this) Please remain a Roman Catholic; please don’t consider converting to Lutheranism. I don’t think I/we have enough time to sort through your lies (of commission and omission).

Answer 2

If you read Martin Luther's theses they are mostly protests of practice not doctrine.

Most of the not so good practices have been cleaned up but whenever people are involved there is always room for improvement.

However when writing about doctrine, I don't think Martin Luther was always right on, for example the first thesis already sounds like trouble:

"When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said 'Repent', He called for the entire life of believers to be one of repentance."

The Catholic Church calls for repentance at certain times of our lives but we are also called to live in happiness and joy.

With love in Christ.

Answer 3

I am glad I converted to Catholicism.

I am always seeking knowledge.

I found this info online as 'additional readings" :


Protestants being thus impious enough to make liars of Jesus Christ, of the Holy Ghost, and of the Apostles, need we wonder if they continually slander Catholics, telling and believing worse absurdities about them than the heathens did? What is more absurd than to preach that Catholics worship stocks and stones for gods; set up pictures of Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and other saints, to pray to them, and put their confidence in them; that they adore a god of bread and wine; that their sins are forgiven by the priest, without repentance and amendment of life; that the pope or any other person can give leave to commit sin, or that for a sum of money the forgiveness of sins can be obtained ? To these and similar absurdities and slanders, we simply answer: "Cursed is he who believes in such absurdities and falsehoods, with which Protestants impiously charge the children of the Catholic Church. All those grievous transgressions are another source of their reprobation."

"But what faith can we learn from these false teachers when, in consequence of separating from the Church, they have no rule of faith? ... How often Calvin changed his opinions! And, during his life, Luther was constantly contradicting himself: on the single article of the Eucharist, he fell into thirty-three contradictions! A single contradiction is enough to show that they did not have the Spirit of God. "He cannot deny Himself" (II Timothy 2:13). In a word, take away the authority of the Church, and neither Divine Revelation nor natural reason itself is of any use, for each of them may be interpreted by every individual according to his own caprice ... Do they not see that from this accursed liberty of conscience has arisen the immense variety of heretical and atheistic sects? ... I repeat: if you take away obedience to the Church, there is no error which will not be embraced.

Source(s):

Additional Reading
Against the Reformers

St Alphonsus Mary De Liguori (1696-1787)Bishop and Doctor of the Church

Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible online

Answer 4

There's a number of reasons.

Many Catholics at the time of Luther agreed with him about his complaints, but didn't want to break the church - you see, Catholics can trace an unbroken line of succession from the apostles Peter and Paul, the former of whom was given dispensation by Jesus himself - and that's not something Catholics are likely to want to give up, as it's one of the things that sets them apart from most other Christian churches.

So instead, they worked within the church itself, and saw a great deal of success within Luther's lifetime. While it was hard going - many reformers had the choice of being excommunicated or being silent - church reformers succeeded in getting reforms to the Catholic church brought in during the Council of Trent (1545), in which modern Catholicism was defined. (Luther died a few years later; by then, however, both churches were far too antagonistic to each other for reconciliation) Gone were the indulgences, gone were simonies, gone was basically most of the complaints Luther had made. The Vatican Councils (I and II) also helped create a much more universal and inclusive church. The Catholic church of today bears little resemblance to the Catholic church of which Luther's theses are about. In fact, probably only a handful of his 95 theses still has any bearing in reality - and they're issues that I can live with.

Theologically, I am disturbed by some of his doctrines, but I have since been corrected in my misapprehensions (below), so I withdraw my objections and will try to learn more about the Lutheran church. :) I have yet to meet a Christian denomination that I truly dislike - but despite having learned a great deal about Baptists, Mormons and Orthodox Christianity, I feel no desire to leave the church.

A final point: Luther and the churches named after him have had their own bad reputations to live up to. Of course the Catholic Church has one of the worst reputations of all Christian churches...but if I were going to convert to another faith, I'd want it to be one that wasn't equally blackened by corruption and genocide. Both churches ended up guilty of horrible crimes against each other (and the Calvinists and Anabaptists). Protestant princes of Germany allied with the muslim Turks to distract Charles V (understandable, though!), Lutheran princes such as Denmark's first reformer king converted to Lutheranism purely as a land grab and not out of any pious values (to be fair, Denmark's SECOND reformer king was a faithful Lutheran!)...and Luther himself turned against the Jews and became a spiteful bigot in his late years. His rants against the Jews for poisoning the drinking water and eating babies is particularly disturbing!

Now, that doesn't change the fact that Luther had some very valid complaints against the Catholic church...at the time. And I can certainly understand why there were so many Protestants during the Reformation, and why they have chosen to remain Protestant! However, I don't see why Catholics today (emphasis on 'today') would want to leave the church. Although the early reformers were excommunicated, later reformers succeeded. Today the church is far from what it was. I don't see any reason why, today, a Catholic would become a Lutheran...or a Lutheran become a Catholic.

God bless, and I apologize for having given so much offense to another poster. It was not my intent to totally demonize the Lutheran church; in my attempt to answer only the question above, I must have been too single-minded to answer fairly. A better answer would have addressed both sides of the story. :)

Answer 5

1) A number of those theses had inaccurate premises. In other words, he accused the Catholic Church of teaching things that it did not teach. For example, his accusations against the Church's teaching on indulgences were based on his belief that a charlatan trying to scare people into giving him money was accurately representing what the Church taught, when he was doing anything but.

2) In other areas, Luther's questions arise from a theology that is not consistent with Christian tradition that goes back to the apostles.

3) And personally, I find his theology of justification cheap and tawdry (as well as based on an incomplete theology of sin) compared to the theology of forgiveness and the soteriology taught by the Catholic Church. I think this is because of his personal tendency toward scrupulosity.

Answer 6

Catholicism has a complete Bible canon.
Protestantism does not.

Catholicism recognizes Sacred Tradition and follows it. Protestantism does not.

Catholicism utilizes all Seven Sacraments.
Protestantism does not.

Those are just a few of many reasons why believers always have and always will choose Catholicism over non-Catholic Christian denominations.

Answer 7

It's about the menu and not the food. Spirituality is natural. All humans wonder where we come from, what the meaning of life is, what happens to us after we die. Early in our history, spirituality got hijacked by those who twisted it into a fear and maintained-ignorance based husbandry of people for political (power) agendas. Religion is like going to a restaurant and, instead of ordering off the menu, one eats the menu, AND, one forms all sorts of dogma and rituals and rules and socializations around the "one-and-only-correct-way" to eat the menu. But, even the Bible warns against such dogma when it speaks of the tree of knowledge. Christians twist that passage to maintain ignorance and controllablity. It does not say to avoid knowledge (or science or logic or reason). It says, to avoid the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which translates, per Vatican studies, into "avoid eating the menu of religious dogma". The Bible has been revised 22,000 times per Vatican report. There are 13,000 official variations of Christianity in the U.S. alone with no consensus among them whatsoever. And, yet, they each bitterly maintain that THEIR menu is the "one - and - only - first - class - ticket - to - heaven". Anyone who believes in eating the menu, whether it's the menu of pre- or post Luther, is still practicing dogma worship. And, that is not worthy of our precious spiritual existence and brief life experience.

Answer 8

In short, probably along the same line of reasoning that Jews still believe in Judeism even after Christ. For the same reasons that Christians still believe in Christ even after Mohammad...

Answer 9

Are you sure that Luther was right? I am not the catholic.

Answer 10

They were afraid to change. Remember that we are talking about a large group of people who have believed in their redemption for a long time.