The Real Martin Luther That Modern Evangelicals Don't Know

By Author: Brother Michael Diamond
Total Articles: 4762
Comment this article

It is a source of great sadness to all Traditional Catholics that such confusion, misinformation and downright fraud exist in the minds of those calling themselves Christians (even some calling themselves Catholic). It's bad enough that the traditions, rites, sacraments and liturgy of the Lord Jesus Christ's own Church have been attacked mercilessly from without, from long before the so-called Reformation until our own times. Yet it is even sadder to realize that insiders are perpetrating damage from within, like the Vatican reformers that began instituting fundamental changes at the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958. Still, Traditional believers are taking corrective action around the world, and the True Church continues prevailing against the gates of hell.

The same cannot be said of the Protestants who call their heretical pronouncements reform, and classify their aberrant teachings as being the true reading of Scripture. More than any other single person, it is Martin Luther, the errant German priest of the early 1500s, who brought unnecessary confusion and vexation to the believers of his age. The world is still reeling ...
... from his actions, but it is not enough to roundly condemn him from ignorance. It is necessary to bring forth the truth to oppose the errors of Luther's rebellion, as well as to acknowledge the true concerns that motivated his actions. It is not sufficient to demonize Luther. It is, however, important to understand what he did. In attempting to do so, the man who appears is the real Martin Luther that modern evangelicals don't know.

Emotional reactions

The reaction to Luther during his lifetime, typified by vehemence and anger rather than conciliatory correction, came from such Catholics as Johannes Cochlaeus. Cochlaeus undertook his battle with Luther as soon as the latter nailed his 95 Theses to a church door in Wittenberg. Cochlaeus did not engage the claims Luther made about indulgences, but essentially dealt in character assassination. Many other contemporaneous Catholic commentators did the same, calling Luther demonic, ignorant, evil, the devil's spawn and all manner of vile names. These emotional reactions, although completely understandable, did not turn out to be the best means by which to counter error. Biblical and religious error must become an opportunity for teaching the truth by those who know it, and this did not happen for many years.

The next several hundred years saw continued harangues against Luther, from such as Heinrich Denifle, Hartmann Grisar and, on the 400th anniversary of the 95 Theses, Msgr. Patrick O'Hare. The thread running through these works is one of anger and condemnation, with virtually no correction given through reference to Holy Tradition, Scripture or papal pronouncements on doctrine. This has backfired in some cases, allowing Protestants to paint Luther as the victim of a corrupt, power- and money-mad Church. Quoting from Denifle or O'Hare, with their undisguised contempt and accusations of satanic influence, will do little to disabuse Protestants (or confused Catholics) of their views. Only the Truth of God regarding the critique that Luther composed can put things back into their proper perspective.

Indulgences, etc.

The fact is, the Church has made mistakes, but not as a Church and not as a religion. Individuals, however, have made, and will always make, errors of judgment that others will attribute more widely and claim are representative of the Church as a whole. With its structure given by the Lord Himself, the Catholic Church has mechanisms whereby improper actions by priests or erroneous statements by theologians will be corrected. There was never any reason for Martin Luther to nail a list of complaints on a church door, and on All Hallow's Eve, of all days. Many Protestants don't have the slightest idea that this is how (or when) it happened.

Interestingly, Protestants normally have no idea of the ways in which Luther continued believing and following many Catholic doctrines, either. For example, Luther venerated the Blessed Virgin, and also believed her to be a perpetual virgin. He agreed with much Catholic teaching, and had more cordial correspondence been possible at the time he may have even been persuaded to continue with his priestly career. Instead, his relations with Rome soured, and the issues and concerns he raised never received a widespread public correction, although a halfhearted papal response was published in 1520.

The real Luther

It is not productive to call Luther a devil or any other name. It is productive, however, to counter his allegations with facts from the Bible, Catholic tradition and history. Rather than call him a heretic and be done with it, all mature Catholics should study the events of the early Reformation era and arrive at an understanding of how rebellion and apostasy spring forth just as often from pride and poor communication as from the devil's influence. Neither the average Catholic nor the average Protestant knows the true story of Luther's errors, and both would be best served by learning the truth and avoiding the name-calling. The truth, of course, comes down on the side of the True Church, as it has a habit of doing.
About Author:
Every wanted to know about the apocalypse? The Most Holy Family Monestery is dedicated to defending and spreading the teachings of the Catholic Faith. Brother Michael Dimond has many years of experience with the Catholic churches, as taught and defined by the authoritative teachings of the popes throughout history. It is also dedicated to exposing in great detail the post-Vatican II pseudo-"Church" and the New Mass. Visit us online today.