If it's any consolation, Bishop Barron's reflection on Luther is perhaps the most insightful I've heard of the heart of Protestantism, that obviously extending to Ryrie. As someone writing a sermon myself right now, it is entirely around the journey back into the Father's embrace. And how that moment of embrace, arguably the one Luther felt, changes everything. To find yourself in front of a loving and faithful Father and to know, in humility, that all I have to give Him was His in the first place, that I am alive and am able to be with Him in a meaningful way. With all due respect to call that heresy is to value the form of Catholicism with a subdued regard to the heart of the universal message of Christianity. That the criticism of the three Solas still doesn't mean empathy can't be extended to the heart of Luther's (let's call it, for lack of a better term) conversion. I think that is all Bishop is trying to say.
@@BishopBarron I appreciate your perspective! I'm not so I can fully articulate why I'm not a Catholic, but hearing someone finally empathize with what I consider the informing spirit/perspective/idea of my faith (without much explicit studying of Luther)--it's refreshing. I reckon you'll see many more honest protestants at your table with this message, for whatever that is worth!
enjoyed listening to this bishop. I still identify as protestant but im starting to enjoy the process of growing and learning about the many aspects to our faith in Jesus.
*R Catholicism has nothing to do with God and His Words. R Catholic Church contradicts Scriptures in every possible ways!* 1. Catholics say Mary was sinless. But BIBLE says Mary offered a sinner's offering. She was a sinner. Bible says Mary needed a Saviour. Lk 2:23-24, Lev 12:6-8, Rom 3:10. 2. Catholics say clergies must be celibate. Yet BIBLE says Peter (supposed R Church first leader) had mother in law. Bible says celibacy is not a qualification for clergies. Mat 8:14-15, Mar 1:30-31, Luk 4:38-39. 3. Catholics say Mary was forever virgin. Yet BIBLE says Jesus had brothers and sisters. Mary was not perpetually virgin. Mk 6:3, Mat 13:55, Mat 27:56, Mar 6:3, Mar 15:40, Mar 15:47. 4. Catholics say confess to R priests in a box. BIBLE says nothing about confessing to priests in a box. Bible says confess to GOD only. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6, Romans 10:9-10. 5. Catholics say drink of the physical blood of Jesus. Yet OT and NT both say do not drink blood. Acts 15, Lev 7:26. 6. Catholics say pray to passed on Mary and "saints". Yet BIBLE says do not contact the dead. NT Church did not record a single case of NT believers asking passed on saints to pray for them. Deut 18:11, Isaiah 8:19. 7. Catholics make and bow down to statues. BIBLE says do not bow down to graven images (statues). Deut 4, Exo 20:4-5. 8. Catholics sprinkles “holy water”. But NT Church of the Bible mentioned nothing about “holy water”. There was no record of any Apostles sprinkling “holy water” on believers. Catholics claimed “holy water” came from OT. Yet Num 5:17 says “holy water” was water used to test adulterous women in OT temple. Hardly the same. Those were for Old Covenant Jews. Not New Testament Christians. 9. Catholics say Peter was pope - bishop of all bishops. Yet BIBLE says Peter was just a leader of the Jerusalem Church. Bible says nothing of the office of bishop of bishops. Gal 2:9, Mat 16:18. 10. Catholics say there is a seat of Peter. Yet BIBLE says nothing about it. Jesus said “not to lord over others”. 11. Catholics has clergy priesthood. Bible says clergy priesthood was done away with in New Testament. There is no clergy priesthood in NT. Heb 7:27, 9:12, 10:10. 12. Catholics preaches Works Salvation (faith + good works + partake R sacraments + submit to R pontiff + be in R Church + devote to Mary = to be saved). Yet Bible says “believe in Jesus to be saved”. Bible says Works Salvation is cursed. Gal 1:8-9. Acts 16:30-31, John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10. 13. Catholics says they must do Penance to atone for their sins. Yet Bible says repent, confess and sins will be forgiven. Catholic Bible changes the word “repentance” in NT into “penance”. Original Greek NT does not use or mean the word penance. Penance = work to atone for sins. Repentance = change of heart. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6. 14. Catholics say Mary went straight to heaven without dying. Yet Bible says nothing about it. 15. Catholics say Islam and Christianity have the same GOD. Yet Islam doesn't believe in death and resurrection of Jesus and Trinity.
Yawn .... Such boring and over tired protestant takes. You've got to pervert everything the church says to come to the conclusions you did, but that's to be expected since you've got no magisterium.
My father was Norwegian Lutheran! My mother was Irish Catholic! Interesting upbringing. Went to Catholic Church but had father questioning RC church?!! Had lots of conversations and laughs I may say!! Thank goodness for Irish humour in our family!! 😂
James also says in this passage, "Faith without works is useless" (2:20), "Faith is completed by works" (2:22) and "Faith without works is dead" (2:26). James also says, "See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone" (2:24). This is actually the only place in the Bible where the words faith and alone are found together, and it is saying that a person is not justified by faith alone. Martin Luther knew that the Bible did not support his theory of sola fide, so he actually tried to take the book of James out of the New Testament, as well as the books of Hebrews, Jude, and Revelations. He later added them back after receiving heat from his peers, but referred to the book of James as an "epistle of straw." He also added the word alone to Romans 3:28 in his translation of the Bible so that it would read that we are justified by our faith alone.
I agree with you Mark. Luther could not be inspired by an encounter with God, because God does not contradict himself. We have the example of thousand of saints, really mystics, they never denied the teaching of the church nor its tradition.
Mark, I agree with the scriptures that you have quoted, however I think that Lutherans and Roman Catholics both have a misconception of each other. I don’t write this to start an argument or a dissension between us, and I will conform to your ideas if I cannot rebuke you. The New Revised Catholic Version of the Bible translates Romans 3:28 as such: “For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.” If we are not being justified by the works prescribed by the law, what are we justified by? Luther translated this passage “By faith alone,” because it makes philosophical sense. Now, Lutherans in no way believe that works are not important. We know and hold fast that when the end comes, God will judge us according to every good and bad thing that we have done. Also, we believe that when one has faith in Jesus Christ, it creates good works. By the blessing of the Holy Spirit, we may finally produce good works according to the Law. Now, on the other hand, many Lutherans believe that Catholics believe that they are only saved by works. This is not certainly true, as we know. Correct me if I am wrong, for I don’t have that good of a memory, but I believe that during the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church stated: “Only those, by the grace of God, can do good works.” Of coarse, I am paraphrasing, but I think I expressed the main point. If anything, you could say that Catholics believe in something called “Grace Alone.” I hope that God blesses you, and that peace may forever be held within your heart. Amen.
Bishop Barron offers a very fair and nuanced perspective of Luther here. It speaks to Barron's scholarship and integrity that he presents this objective picture of a man whom many other Catholics would be quick to simply dismiss without consideration.
There are a lot of liberal Catholics like myself or even nonpracticing ones who see him as a hero. There is a pretty thin line between us and Lutherans and, given the politically-motivated purge of left-wing Catholics in America right now by the American Church, many ultimately do become Lutheran. I have come to see Luther merely as a galvanized and militant version of St. Francis of Assisi, perhaps even someone God used to punish the Catholic Church for its blatant hypocrisy and evil during the 1500s and before then. Both were told or felt they needed to reform the Church. Francis did beautiful things but did not succeed on such a grand scale... Luther ended up creating the modern world due to proclaiming a hyper-charged version of that message at a time when technology and politics could carry the message to devastating and seemingly irreparable consequences. God in the Old Testament put his people through similar events and timespans of disarray and disunity to correct them, so it's no wonder he would use someone like Luther. Luther is a hero and I hope he is in paradise.
I’m Lutheran and I enjoy watching your videos. I have understood that faith and works are sort of hand and hand. If you truly have faith in Jesus as your Lord and Savior, then good works can’t help but glow out of you. If you have no good works , then one must seriously question your faith in God. As Jesus said you can judge a tree by the fruit it bears.
@@deneentorkelson6131 Protestants and Catholics alike struggle with sin - they don't go around "not being able to help having good works flowing out of them".
Deneen Torkelson listen to Luther, here’s the proof , God says not by works lest Ye boast , pride is what God hates most as that was what caused Lucifer to fall, click on link. www.google.com.au/search?q=kjv+grace+through+faith&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari
When I was growing up in the Christian faith I thought of these mantras, by grace alone, by faith alone, we're just emphatic sayings in order to give God as much glory as possible. I thought "well I do have to do a bunch of stuff, but God is so good and awesome I'm just gonna say it's all Him!" But thanks be to God when I realized these were not just emphatic expressions, and not just the outcries of a young lover. Once I saw that salvation was truly by God's grace "alone," and through faith "alone" it changed everything for me. And it changed everything for Luther too.
As a Lutheran/Calvinist whose always believed that if you don’t have works you’re going to hell, I’m starting to realize maybe I’m more Catholic than I realize
You actually go to hell BECAUSE you have works; evil works. You can do good works too, but even atheists can do good works. In order to believe that good works can keep you out of hell, you’d have to accept that an atheist can go to heaven. How could a person who denies God’s existence possibly go to heaven?
@@sly8926 Bruh we don't preach "Sola Opus" (Salvation by works alone). We teach that you need a faith with works. That's what the bible teaches: "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone... For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead." (James 2:24,26)
@@a_Catholic_Ant James is not a swearing how one is saved. He’s answering how you can TELL one is saved. If there are no good works that you can see, that person is obviously not saved. But there can be no good works without faith. There can be no salvation without faith. And faith alone saves you. Ephesians 2:8-9
@@sly8926 This verse seems to be a condemnation of Pelagianism if read closely, that you are saved by yourself and not by God. Both Catholics and Protestants condemn this heresy. How do I know it's talking only about Pelagianism? It says "and this is not your own doing". The works talked about in the last part is talking about how our works doesn't earn salvation. Obedience is impossible without God. However, how we act can affect salvation. For example, one of the clearest condemnations of homosexuality also supports the Catholic position of mortal sin (sins that if you commit will damn you if you don't repent in confession). 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."
Our journey is to be better. To get closer to perfection. We will never be perfect. We will try. We will fail but we will learn from all those who came before us. God bless this world. We journey on. We get closer to God.
I love listening to this Bishop even though Im not Catholic. To be honest Im caught in the fence between Evangelicals and Catholics. As times I feel like going to RCIA classes. Yet, as an example of my hesitation is, I keep reading about being judged about our works - good and bad - yet even in Psalm 103:12 my sins will be removed from me ".....as far as the east is from the west." One could argue that the east is at the heals of the west, but the next verse talks about God's compassion towards His children. How compassionate is God if He doesnt forget our sins as long as we fear Him? On the flip side of the coin is my paradigm regarding "work". As far as "works" go, to me if Peter decided not to step out of the boat and just say, "Yes, God, I have faith in You but if You dont mind I ll just stick it out here safely in the boat." Where is the faith if you dont work it out to step out of the boat? Then yes, such faith is dead! Now you can see my dilemma. Anyone else feels this way or am I doomed?
From my Catholic point of view: We're in this hole, covered with mud and muck (original sin.) Jesus throws us a rope - he's paid for us sins so we can get out. Every good thing we do and say (works) however small, pushes us a higher up the rope. Every bad thing weighs us down and makes us slip down again. God wants us to succeed. For those who do, in His mercy He forgets that He ever saw their sins and how much they struggled on the way up. I hope this helps. God bless.
Pray this prayer . >> DEAR JESUS, YOU KNEW I COULD NEVER DO ENOUGH GOOD THINGS TO DESERVE HEAVEN SO YOU DIED ON A CROSS SO I CAN BE FORGIVEN. PLEASE SEND THE HOLY SPIRIT TO HELP ME BECOME MORE LIKE THE PERSON YOU WANT ME TO BE.
I love your discussion on ML. When I read a biography on ML… I was also struck by his 100% love of God and Jesus. But one thing he also seemed focused on was how the church(Pope hierarchy) was grasping the power of….who forgives sin. When God frees the slaves from Egypt…there is a parallel to what ML is looking at. Freedom of the individual…ML studies scripture and concludes…the individual has a direct pipeline to Jesus (God to Jews)… the sins have been forgiven….no humans necessary. (No middleman, no indulgences). I know nothing about this subject… but I was really taken in by ML.. his fiery personality and bravery for the time he lived in. He was devoted also to Paul’s writings (so he didn’t dislike ALL Jews), he had quite a sharp tongue… but I think Bishop Barron you hit on the reason for that… he was in love with God. ♥️✝️
I would like to know what is the goal of modern Ecumenism. Return protestants back to the Church, or search for a compromise between the two?(something political) I'm also concerned about some of the statements made by the Holy Father, in the "ecumenical dialogue" He seems to emphasize more common social action rather than search for the Truth.. doing exactly the contrary of what Pope Benedict did. Could you explain the actual position of the Holy See? thank you
Mostly the latter from the view both are Christians and that's what's most important, though I can't exclude the possibility some individuals within the Catholic church might favor the first, and some individuals within the protestant church might prefer reforming the Catholic church to be become more like the protestant church.
Will find answers in towardsovietamerica.com by communist William Z. Foster, “School of darkness” by Dr. Bella V. Dodd & “Good Bye, Good Men” by Michael S. Rose.
Hi, Bishop - as a baptized Lutheran I enjoyed your perspective on Luther. I always interpreted his increased vitriol against the upper clergy and church itself as his "born again" moment, where he was able to see Christ more clearly than he ever had before. That said, he indeed rebelled against the Catholic establishment and many of us still follow his liturgical blueprint for the worship of the holy trinity - very similar but in contrast to our Catholic brethren. My question of late has been this: Are we Christians nearing a point where current societal trends are forcing us to defend our positions of faith in outspoken ways similar to Martin Luther's outward criticism of the church? In your opinion are various denominations nearing or have already reached a point where we can present a united front and loudly proclaim God's presence in a world that turns away from it?
Exactly! I think I'm hearing you say that in this time in the history of the world, the last thing we need is bickering between Christians who for the most part believ the same things. The great commission of making beliwvers of all nations baptising them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit! That should be our paramount mission! Now is not the time to create stumbling blocks for people to come to faith in Jesus Christ and his saving work. The Pope, Bishops, Priests, Pastors, Deacons, and associate pastors need to teach and preach THE Truth. Not watered down, feel good sermons. Teach and preach the good news of salvation but also preach and teach about the truth of evil in the world and the truth of Heaven, Hell, the Devil, and his demons. Preach and teach the truth. His name is Jesus Christ. There is truth in no other. AMEN.
Hi Bishop Barron PLEASE READ, I'm currently watching your series on catholicism. I've always admired this series, thank you. I am born and raised catholic and admire the peace that fills me when I am at mass, retreats, and ccd. My brother is attending school in Indiana to be a lutheran pastor. He will be up there for 4 yrs. with his wife(shes lutheran) and my nephew (he's 10 mths.) I love my brother, his wife, and my nephew with all my heart. I know that they will be okay because they love christ so much. Yet this has caused confusion for my family. I don't know exactly what I am asking you I think I just wanted you to know. I typed this before watching the video.
Bishop Robert Barron It is with respect that I make my next comment, how can we call an "experience of grace" to something that led Fr. Martin Luther to reject the Church as a sacrament of salvation?
Bishop Robert Barron I think you have a point. but on the other hand Martin Luther not only interpreted and explained his new ideas, but he also rejected and "refuted" the teachings of the Church misleading thousands of souls, even until this day. I never thought about the "Solas" of Luther as expressions of love, but as denials of Catholic doctrine: "Sola Fide" a denial of the necessity of good works for final justification, "Sola Scriptura" a denial of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium as binding authorities for all Christians. In any event I know you know these things very well. Thank you for taking time to graciously respond to my comment Bishop, I really appreciate it. Thank you again!
And I grant as much! I said that Trent was right in criticizing the Solas from a doctrinal perspective. But can we find absolutely nothing valuable in Luther's religious experience?!
Remember Luther never wanted to leave the church. He wanted to reform it and change it. To get rid of the abuses and corruption at the time. It was the Pope who excommunicated him. Luther was a faithful member of the Augustinian Order.
Alex perhaps the only way it could work is simply by a more poetic and/or literary expression of our need for God and His grace. Clearly it is impossible to compromise on the Lutheran "sola" principles, but I think a good step forward would be to simply acknowledge how wonderfully important the saving grace of God is. Then again, I don't see how the Catholic Church hasn't already expressed this fully, and perhaps it is protestants that need to recognize it in us.
Actually he's an extremely orthodox man, and if he wasn't, he wouldn't be my personal hero. He says nothing contradictory to Church teaching here and many times he has called out the issues created by Vat II. I believe that he is being a very clever evangelist in this video and I applaud him for reaching out to our protestant brothers and sisters.
Bishop Robert Barron Of course I did. I'm not questioning the premise of the video, just wondering about the mechanism behind how it could be played out in practice
Eric Davenport Friend, an honest question: is there in your opinion any value whatsoever to ecumenism? Vatican II and the last five Popes have all enthusiastically embraced it. But if Luther is nothing but a Hell-bound heretic, why would we even bother having discussions with Protestants?
Polonius: "My lord, I will use them according to their desert." Hamlet: "God’s bodykins, man, much better. Use every man after his desert, and who should ’scape whipping? Use them after your own honor and dignity. The less they deserve, the more merit is in your bounty. "
@Bishop Robert Barron YES! I'm a new Catholic. I desperately want to bring Protestants back into the True Church. But until now, I've not heard an intellectually honest Catholic view of Luther. Thank you for looking at the truth about Luther. You did an excellent job here. (Although I would be severely unqualified to judge your work. But for what it's worth I think you did great and what you said was very helpful.) Yes I know Luther was wrong in many areas. And they were big. But by saying things like "he was a rebellious monk" (which until now was pretty much the only thing I could find Catholics saying about him), we are creating a completely unnecessary and I would almost say sinful wall for those Protestants that God is calling into the Catholic Church. I think that we have to look honestly at Luther, stand strong on the things that he was wrong on, but also recognize the things that he was right about. Some of the things that he was confronting the Church about were correct, as witnessed by the fact that the Church later changed on those things. His intention had not been to start a new branch of Christianity or to break from the Catholic Church. He wanted to reform within the Catholic Church. But the Pope not only excommunicated him but tried to have him killed. That's a big thing. Right there you have the rift. And again, I'm not trying to pretend that he wasn't wrong about a lot of things. I think that we need to genuinely look at the walls between us and Protestants, as you've done here with one of them, and honestly evaluate them. For example, we insist on saying that we pray to Mary. Ask your phone to give you the definition of pray. It says something along the line of begging for something from a deity. It might mention also an archaic meaning. And we know this. We laugh at Protestants who think that we're worshiping Mary and we say haven't you ever read Shakespeare? Well Shakespeare was centuries ago. The English language has changed since then. Yet we insist on using this archaic meaning of a word that we know causes Protestants to stumble. And I say that we know it because we shake our heads at them as if they're stupid because they don't understand the archaic meaning. WE LEAD THEM to believe that we are doing something that we know is heretical. (We lead them to think that we're worshiping Mary) I'm sorry but there's a problem with that. Why don't we just use modern English and say that we ask Mary to pray for us? As I said, I'm a new Catholic, so maybe I'm missing something. Maybe by saying it that way I'm losing some of true doctrine??? If so then I want to be corrected (hopefully kindly). I do not want to sacrifice any true doctrine. But from what I understand at this point, it would be accurate to say that we ask Mary to pray for us. We can express what we do without making it a stumbling block to Protestants that God might be calling into the Catholic Church. As someone who wants very very much to see Protestants brought back into the Catholic Church, this video was encouraging to me. Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.
Good points especially about Mary. Btw, Luther was a true follower of Her even though he was thinking about himself as a prophet and hated papacy and Catholic Church, which is bad as he hated the body of Christ and Him himself living Him at the same time. That's a crazy mixture. You're not wrong about the doctrine. Someone described the Church as the Noah's ark. It's the only way to salvation but due to so many animals on board it's filled with poop (our, the Church members' sins)
@@tommygun333 Yes! Since writing my comments I've found that he called her the mother of God. I still stand pretty much with what I said, but I've also learned a little bit more about that period. Luther split the church which was bad although that wasn't what he intended to do. However on the other side, there were religious and laity Who knew that there was a lot wrong in the church at the time. They quietly prayed and tried to be as godly as they could be. As a result, there was the Catholic Reformation. Wow! Fighting against something isn't necessarily the best way. Especially when we're talking about spiritual things. I so admire those people who prayed and worked on their personal Piet y. I think that's probably a lot more pleasing to God and it definitely yielded results.
Hi, how are you doing? I recommend reading the book of Galatians. And see what it says that justification is by faith alone and that adding works is a false gospel.
Thank you, Bishop Barron, for sharing your view on Luther. I am a baptist who has been reading Leo J. Trese's The Faith Explained, so as to understand the Catholic faith.
Well done, beautiful exegesis of the life of Luther who enlightened the world afresh with the Love and Mercy and Grace of God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Only a Protestant can fully understand the Grace of God and who can write a hymn like, "Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me, l once lost but now l am found, blind but now l see ". 🙂👌👊👍
The composer sold slaves. How is that understanding the Grace of God? Love and mercy? Tell that to the Jews. Read the books which Martin Luther read, because they don’t exactly say ‘love’ as much as they do ‘hate’ .
@@BullShark-i2z Yes clown he did sell slaves which is the whole point of the hymn he wrote. Read the Council of Florence what the Catholic Church's view is about Jews which is no different to Luther an ex Catholic. And while you about it study the Talmud to see what Jews think of our Lord Jesus Christ and Christians. If you can't think critically then go for another vaccine and wear your mask.
@@mosesmanaka8109 That was just unnecessary nasty. Jews are God’s Chosen People. God told HIS Chosen People that HE will never stop Loving them. During His Passion, Jesus said “Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing. “ . Jesus told the Pharisees “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut the kingdom of heaven in front of people; for you do not enter it yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. ” . Anti-masker/anti-vaxxer arguments have zero credibility. Before vaccinations, the child mortality rate was much higher than it is now. Masks protect others. Do you really think that it’s the Christian thing to spread a deadly virus to someone with a compromised immune system? Do you actually have an argument? Or do you just have nasty remarks that even a 12 year old would call immature? Now, I would much prefer to have an intellectual discussion.
As a Lutheran, I would like to thank Bishop Barron for this and all of the other videos! I find them extremely interesting and I am enjoying them a lot.
I'm Lutheran lcms. Please do me a favor in the future. Don't invoke the name of my church. (A )you don't know what you're talking about. And (B )I hope you have a priest following you everywhere you go. The Bible says if you look at a woman. With lust in your eyes you've already committed it. Just the way we think of offends Yahweh. You're obviously not conservative Lutheran are you? Or maybe you just never payed attention . Again please label yourself as non-denominational from from now on. A true Lutheran doesn't speak the way you speak. Good day to you.
I found the video very informative As a convert from Evangelical to Catholic church I have been trying to study the histories and mindset of the different theologies. Can you recommend any media or literature that can help break it down so I can have a hope of mentally digesting?
Karl Keating's Catholicism and Fundamentalism is a great overview of the idfferences between Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholicism. Saved my faith a few years back.
It might be good to listen to Pints with Aquinas by Matt Fradd. It's a podcast where he breaks down St Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiæ and translates it into an explanation of the varying perspectives of the Christian faith, while addressing certain questions which may be asked from a non-Catholic perspective
I think John Henry Newman is one of the most enlightening authors in this area. Apologia Pro Vita Sua and Essay on Development of Christian Doctrine showcase the protestant side just as well as they do the Catholic one as he was the most important Anglican figure of the 19th century.
A quote from your hero: “Did I not tell you earlier that a Jew is such a noble, precious jewel that God and all the angels dance when he farts? And if he were to go on to do something coarser than that, they would nevertheless expect it to be regarded as a golden Talmud”.
Here's some telling quotes by Martin Luther as well: “If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.” “Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.” “If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham” “To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” - “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs” “It is more important to guard against good works than against sin.” “Good works are bad and are sin like the rest.”
Tha's why thousands of Catholics leave the church, because our pastors don't embraced the true anymore, they want to be inclusive and nice rather than loyal and truthful to our faith.
True Bishop Barron used some Interesting terminology referring to Luther, here I added my reflections on his terms. Crackling - I tend to associate with flames. Squinting - A difficulty in seeing something Fighter pugnacious - In a priest? should only be to defend God and the Church not attack it Lover - Luther fell in love with himself not God. . St Michael was both a Fighter and lover when he defended God. So over the top - in love with himself that he put his ideas over everyone, removed parts of the bible and thought so highly of himself that he inserted Alone into scripture. That sound like the Vice of Pride.
leaving the Church (true church - catholic), is like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. you confuse inclusive with the term "welcoming ". Paul said I became all things to all people so that some would be saved (inclusive?).
Dear Bishop Barron, you are a very wise man. Your words could bring catholics and protestants together, so they can see each other as brothers. Perhaps Luther's phrase that I love the most is " Every good Christian must read and write".
Catholicism and being a born again Christian with the same theology that Luther has, indeed the one that emanates from the pages of scriptures, are like oil and water. So he can say nice things about Luther, but it's all a superficial show and will not unite anyone when push comes to shove. It's a lie.
With regard to a great many comments and responses seen here below ...know this: "For those who have the Holy Faith nothing needs to be said.... but for those who have not the Faith...nothing can be said''... how true how true.
@@georgepenton808 I don't see it that way. Luther said his theology stands or falls on 'faith alone.' Bishop Barron just dismissed that as the exaggerating effects of puppy love. It was a charitable take, to be sure, but arguably all the more effective a denunciation because of that.
Martin Luther’s criticism of indulgences in the Catholic Church AND the serf like grip of German elites on 90% of the people might have unleashed a yearning for individual freedom. I hope Bishop Barron will give another lecture on Martin Luther and the effects his writings had on the people of that time. I enjoyed this lecture very much, Martin Luther is a fascinating figure. I read that Martin Luther King Sr. changed his name because he admired Martin Luther. And ML’s writings seems to have created many other Christian religions. ❤✝️
THIS LIFE therefore is not righteousness, but growth in righteousness, not health, but healing, not being but becoming, not rest but exercise. We are not yet what we shall be, but we are growing toward it, the process is not yet finished, but it is going on, this is not the end, but it is the road. All does not yet gleam in glory, but all is being purified. -Martin Luther
This is the first time I've heard this critique of Luther; a critique of romantic extremes, of poetry. If I were a Catholic, I would pun it "the poetic effects of sin'.
I applaud you Bishop Barron for you objectivity and the fact that you are open minded about Luther, this is indeed a step forward in the ecuminical conversation. I mean it seem to me that the Catholic view in the USA is way more open minded than other part of the world, probably because Protestantism is still in majority in USA. I always say when I talk about Luther is the fact that he wanted to reform the Catholic Church and he was right if you see what the Catholic Church did in the 16th Century with the indulgence, fortunately it was abolished by Pope Pius V in 1567.
Still being done today. I go to Catholic church and there's still offerings to release the souls of purgatory. Purgatory to me was a place before Jesus was even born. Because no one couldnt go anywhere after death.
+Bishop Robert Barron - could you please elaborate more on those points where, as you said, "I disagree with lots and lots of his ideas."? You seemed to be solely laudatory of Luther, without specifying with which of his ideas you - or Catholics, in general - should disagree. Thank you.
I'm sorry, but I didn't hear any response to my point that your video might lead some people to believe that they can be good Lutherans - remaining outside of the Catholic Church - and still be saved... almost as if there's really no good reason for Catholics to evangelize to protestants. BTW, what is your reaction to this response to your Luther video: www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-martin-luther-bishop-barron
Cecilia Ortiz Better than praying the rosary is reading the New Testament and understanding what it says. The rosary, where did it come from? I bet Paul, Peter, and the rest of the apostles never knew about this ritual.
Cecilia Ortiz The rosary is just a repetition of made up prayers created by someone and it is something like a talisman, There is NO reason to jump to the conclusion that because Jesus gave the apostle John to Mary, Jesus gave the whole of humanity to her, this is an exaggeration and a misrepresentation of the text. This is typical Catholic Biblical wrong way of interpreting scriptures, and just an example of how scripture is twisted to support a made up believe. If you want to learn christianity stop reading catholic books that distort what you are reading, use your own understanding, not someone else’s you will do better.
I'm a Lutheran who sees much to appreciate in the Council of Trent. I wish it had been a truely ecumenical council in its time. This is a healthy perspective which I share and is necessary to bring Lutherans - and Luther himself - back into the catholic church. I pray that the dialogue continues.
According to 2000 + yrs of Dogma and Doctorine that has been spun and what scripture that you want to cherry pick.Good Luck and cover your mouth and wash your hands
@@bigwoody4704 Yeah, yeah, yeah. You are a typical revolutionary who hates Church founded by Jesus and prefers the one founded by Luther who was visited by a devil every night (he wrote about that himself). He also was throwing feces at the devil. He also wrote about this.
I suggest bishop Barron should read more about Luther, specially his last years, after the reformation. Only hten he would understand the serious mistakes of Luther's thought and of protestantism in general.
Thank you for your answer, Fr. Robert. Although you indeed say in a part of the video that you disagree massively with Luther, you also express of him as a "pius and brilliant" religious man, who felt deeply inloved with God. This way of expressing about Luther conveys the idea, whether you intended to or not, that his teachings were right except some minor mistakes. Besides the three "solas" you mention, which are great mistakes (and it is not clear enough the severity of these errors in the video) it is worth mentioning for example what Luther thought about human reason («The reason is the devil's great whore, a fucking meal for scabies and leprosy»), or what he thought about human freedom (that is incompatible with God whom knows and determines everything), or about human nature (radically and irremediably corrupted), or about grace (which is like white snow over human muck, so that any effort towards good doing, is not only useless but it's even a diabolic temptation, where by his famous phrase: sin hard, and believe harder), and so on. It is shockingly instructive to read what Luter himself wrote on this matters, excerpts of which one can find collected by good catholic apologists. Also about his life in his last years, and the way he used to express about his enemies, about the Pope, and about the Universities of Paris and Lovain, about religious life, about celibacy, about good manners, and so on. I think that the last thing Satan wants is that we come to know the truth about the so-called Reformation, because when a protestant discovers the truth, he becomes catholic at once. The sad thing is that we catholics, aren't helping enough to turn this truth more accessible. Also a common mistake is to think that catholic thought about grace (or faith or scripture) was obscured in the time of Luther.
Bishop Barron specifically addressed the errors of the solas, as well as saying the he massively disagreed with Luther's theology. Yes Luther did love Jesus, however imperfectly and misguided he may have been, and yes he was brilliant, however he misused his brilliance.
Dear Fr Robert, I'm sorry if I twisted your words, I didn't intend to do so. I hope my comment might be useful to others that fall in the same misunderstanding.
"Luther turned priests into laymen by turning laymen into priests" says Marx. This seems to be the objective meaning of Protestanism regardless of intentions.
Scott _____ Seriously? You are claiming to know more about Catholicism than Bishop Barron? I recommend you to read some of HIS books before you pass such flaccid and shallow judgments
I am at a crossroads (no pun intended😉). I was raised, rather loosely, Catholic. Not strict or “cradle Catholic” by any means. I am now trying to find my way back, retracing my steps and a very stale trail of breadcrumbs. In so doing, Bishop Barron has been instrumental and I am grateful to him and the Word on Fire ministry. I am struggling though, with some issues I have with the Catholic Faith. Number one being the requirement of priestly celibacy. As far as I have been able to determine, this is certainly not Biblical. I am certain that this requirement has worked to draw in the pedophiles and homosexuals that have, for lack of a better word, “infiltrated” the Church and used the Priesthood for cover. I am drawn to Lutheran and Episcopalian Faiths as what I believe to be the “next, best, thing”. I always loved the authenticity of the Catholic Church being started by Christ as he directed St. Peter to build the Church. I also love the Sacraments and the overall Doctrine of Catholicism and the basic approach to Faith that Catholicism teaches us. I just cannot accept how they have hidden pedophiles and openly accept homosexual/predator bishops and priests. That seems to be their “legacy” today and it is a major stumbling block for me. I say, to whomever might be listening, allow priests and nuns to marry if they want to. Eradicate the perversion rife in the ranks of the Church. I see this requirement as, somewhat, sadistic in nature and has lead the Church to scandal.
Catholicism is not part of Christianity. There's a reason why these individuals broke away from the Vatican. The problems with Catholcism are far too many to list, but among them are: praying to Mary (who often sits upon an altar within their church, sometimes with candles lit) which is 100% idolatry, veneration of the saints and praying to angel, purgatory (which was, and is, literally a scam to con money out of ppl back in the day to build Cathedrals). Catholics have a totally different doctrine than what's in the Bible too... they don't preach the gospel. In fact, Christ is so busy or mean or whatever that you have to pray to His mom. Rome was, and has always been, a front for Satan to persecute the true Church. If they weren't feeding Christians to the lions, figures like Bloody Mary were persecuting members of Christ's true church who only wanted to preach scripture in their own native languages (which was only in Latin, only readable by the elites of the day). Btw, the Catholic church wasn't created by Peter. Anyways, Steven Lawson teaches about these Reformers, and it's fascinating. It gives a glimpse into why these men fell away from Catholicism and what they were about.
The scripture is set in stone, but the fabrications of man are not. In the same way that Jews strayed from the light of God, I fear too that the Catholics have. Although Luthers actions have lead to some fairly ridiculous denominations and beliefs, those who are true in faith and follow the light of God, know the hiss of the snakes.
I was brought up in Catholicism and came to the same conclusion that Luther came to from reading and studying the scriptures. I didn't even know who Luther really was either, so if people want to say I was brainwashed by Luther they would be wrong. I am convinced by the Word of God and not by any human being.
Catholics always say all real Christians are brainwashed by Luther even though Luther was not a part of the conversion - just God and his Word! Praise the Lord! I also found the same beliefs through scripture! I think Luther just became a born again Christian is all.
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr The issue is they listen too much to their so called leaders especially that Muppet dressed up in the gay Mardi gras outfit.
Multiple truths are a fact of life. And also, the hierarchy of truths... Love is at the top: "The end of my labors has come. All that I have written appears to be as so much straw after the things that have been revealed to me." When later asked ... to return to writing, Aquinas said, "I can write no more. I have seen things that make my writings like straw."
Good God, your mind is just so much pumped up ... I'm watching your channel for a few days and can't believe. Just relax, exhalate and enjoy the beatiful life around you! Wish you the best preacher!
@soriano147 I read them. I expected a lot from the 95 Theses. I expected Fr. Luther to lament so many things about the Catholic church. I expected iconography and Idolatry to be forefront. The 95 theses were more like 95 stanzas of a poem. I was taught in public school that paying for indulgences and the weaponization of confession were the reasons that Protestant religions were on the right side of history. When I read the 95 theses I found a lot of overlap with the Catholic Church. I found a lot of reaching as to why Catholicism was "wrong." As someone who never wanted to be Catholic, when I finally read Luther's actual words, and learned about his personal life, I knew that Catholicism was for me. It is hard to explain over text/comments. Luther was probably a good man, but he also claimed in his journal/testimony that he would fart at demons that he visualized. I'm not sure he is the leader you think he is. He was not the first leader of apostasy and will certainly not be the last. My concern is that Luther led a lot of people away from the Mother Church by claiming to be logical. Luther led a revolution that led his newfound church to continue to canonize Saints (which is not protestant), and, therefore against his teaching. He led a church that mostly follows the Catholic tradition. He eliminated 7 books of the bible by his own decree (despite the doctrine of Sola Scriptura). He downplayed and therefore destroyed sacraments of the church. He created an entire schism while claiming to be faithful to God. Worst of all, the Jews love Luther. If you believe in the New Testament as the new Covenant of the Lord Jesus you should be fearful that the old ways may corrupt the new. Sacrifice in the New Testament is of bread an water to Jesus. The old ways... well.... they require a lot worse sacraments.
@@firekoovin3347 The Pope disagrees with you. "I think that the intentions of Martin Luther were not mistaken. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not correct. But in that time, if we read the story of the pastor, a German Lutheran who then converted when he saw reality-he became Catholic-in that time, the Church was not exactly a model to imitate. There was corruption in the Church, there was worldliness, attachment to money, to power . . . and this he protested. . . . And today Lutherans and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err. He made a medicine for the Church." --Pope Francis
@@Mygoalwogel demonic shit bro he actually said that???wtf is with V2 now a days? I dont want to be like a protestent that makes up their own religion, oh my God do we have so many wolves in the one true holy church. anyhow many catholic saints, popes of the past, and peter would condem protestents, There's only one true church you could ever go to.
On the Jews & Their Lies is one of the most controversial works by Protestant reformer, Martin Luther. In one of the most notorious chapters in the book, Luther urges the German people to “raze and destroy [the Jews’] houses,"
Luther got a raw deal - he lived in an age of a totally corrupt church - Luther was a member of the Observant Augustine order - an order that saw problems in the church back then - an orthodox Lutheran can be just as holy as a Catholic - I'm Catholic with no intent of going Lutheran but Martin Luder (his birth name) got a lot right.
I am Roman Catholic and I agree- for me the most profound writings in Christianity come from Augustine Paul and Martin Luther what is most powerful about Luther he does not go into --his moral anthropology his understanding of Sin which we Catholics can learn from Man is a piece of sh... covered with snow ---harsh but it allows costly grace!!
As someone who has only come to faith 3 years ago. I have been part of a new-charismatic movement, however, I have struggled with the certain aspects of Protestantism, namely sola fide! My conversion came through my first ever attempt at Lent in which I abstained from pornography and masturbation. Abstinence was the “works” and I called out to Jesus which was in faith. Not to think I can score points with God through my works, but certainly one can be drawn into deeper relationship with Him. Therefore, I think faith and works cannot be divided, as it says in James 2:18. Furthermore, I need the structure of Lent, a designated season to which we can all deny ourselves and draw closer to Him. I will be attending mass this Ash Wednesday 👌
I went to the Traditional Latin Mass this Ash Wednesday, it so happened to fall on my birthday this year. It was the most beautiful thing I’ve experienced. I started with the Charismatic group in my town. Until a man tried to hit on me. I’m married. He took me to a back room to pray for me but he cornered me. Grabbing my hand. I ran to the nearest door and never went back. I didn’t leave the church. I left the group. Now I’m looking into becoming a Parish member in the Traditional Latin Church. I love history. I think since I started to look into the church’s history. I’ve been more interested in the Traditional Latin Mass since. Never looked back. It’s awesome 😎
As a Christian you should put away porn for good. How can you call yourself a follower without following? Only children of God will be saved. Do you live for the flesh which ends in death or life for the spirit which leads to everlasting life?
A very interesting video. I find the solos very interesting. After speaking about grace to various Christians I find that Catholics, Protestants and the orthodox have a very different definition of grace as an example. I may have to read those books you mentioned!
Bao Duong be careful , google Catholics worshiping Mary before you look too deeply at them, they nearly all say they don’t, click on link for verse regarding grace through Faith www.google.com.au/search?q=kjv+grace+through+faith&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari
@@claudius_drusus_ James is canonical scripture in every Protestant church on earth, including Lutheran. You are too much tuned in to amateur Catholic apologists, who make a good living as "apologists." These amateurs are old pros at reviving the old divisions, as if 500 years of perspective and distance hasn't brought more light than heat. Father Barron brings perspective, and balance. Here he fails to mention that Luther described the faith he wrote about as "a living thing, full of every good work." Luther derided prescribed good works as brownie points to gain favor with God. He saw outrageous abuses in the practice, and he objected to a preacher raising money for the construction of St.Peter's by selling indulgences to get your deceased relatives released from purgatory. His pitch was this: "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, a soul from purgatory springs." The works that Luther lauded were those that sprung from the gift of faith that God gives, works that spring from the heart. This kind of faith " works by love," which comes from a verse in Paul's epistle to the Galatians, an epistle which Luther cherished and compared to his beloved wife Kathryn, a former nun who brought domestic tranquility and good order, and the blessing of offspring, into his otherwise turbulent life.
A very well argued analysis. Such a refreshing difference from my early Catholic education that made no attempt to see the reasons for the Reformation and just condemned it as stupid and selfish.
As an ex Roman Catholic I'm in agreement with Luther that Scripture teaches that justification is through faith alone but that true faith always produces good works. I'm also in agreement with him over the Papacy being the Antichrist, that praying to Mary and the saints is idolatry, that the mass isn't a sacrifice, that the Roman Catholic church isn't the one true Church, and that Scripture is the sole final authority in matters of teaching and doctrine.
Why would God allow this heresy to be the base of the church for 1500? Use your brain because you’re fooling yourself. The arrogance to think you’ve outsmarted everyone. This is pride.
This was good. Also, I like the context that Bishop Barron gives this in his video that I recently cam across "Bishop Barron on Martin Luther". I think it is both simple and revealing.
Here's some telling quotes by Martin Luther as well: “If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.” “Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.” “If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham” “To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” - “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs” “It is more important to guard against good works than against sin.” “Good works are bad and are sin like the rest.”
@@joshcruise2657 Compared to the 7 disastrous Popes that ruled for years on end, without the RCC removing them completely , and still calling itself the one true church , there has been grave miscarriages of justice in both the protestant and the RCC . Just one very good reason not to follow a man/ organization for any reason and only follow what the new testament says about how we are to conduct ourselves and what we should believe.
@@georgepenton808 It would be foolish to ignore the good and just focus on the bad, however when the roman catholic church decided that it was the one true church so long ago, it has not been living up to it's reputation that it set forth, for itself. There were and are today born again Christians martyred for their faith in Jesus and some called themselves catholics and some called themselves believers . Again we are to follow Jesus, not a church, not an organization, and not any man , martyr or otherwise. What can I learn from a martyr ? That I have a long way to go to get to their level of belief.
@@brucewmclaughlin9072 Christ established a Church. Christians say they believe in the catholic (universal) Church in the Creed, which was and remains the definition of what it means to be a Christian. We can argue all day, as Catholics and Protestants tend to do, about what each line of the Creed means (here, for instance, which Church), but what you are arguing now seems clearly outside the Creed and thus arguably is not Christian.
@@paulmiller3469 What I am saying is not to follow a man , or an organization but Christ alone . The scriptures are there for a reason not to be added to by an organization that has proved itself to be corruptible ,just like the reformation that brought forth so many corrupted beliefs. The Church as defined by Eph 2:18-22 in contrast to the controversial Matthew verse about Peter and the Rock. 2 Tim.3 :16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Written before the new testament and still valid. Did I answer your concern?
As a Lutheran, I found this video very fascinating. While I strongly affirm Lutheran theology, I definitely enjoy, and share Bishop Barron's characteristics of Luther as a person (and he certainly had his flaws no doubt). However, I find a lot of peculiar claims in the comment section. I'm by far no expert in Catholic ecclesiology, but viewing ex ecclesiam nulla salus in light of the articles of Lumen Gentium (especially on the Holy Spirit), I find quite a few of them rather odd (even hillarious, had this not been such serious issue). As a side note, speaking of the Reformation, I personally believe it was a huge strategical mistake by the Catholic Church not to give Cajetan mandate to engage Luther theologically (in contrast to on church authority alone) in their debate. What could have been the debate of the century turned into a textbook example of talking past each other.
I believe Rome vastly underestimated the impact Luther was going to have on the continent (mainly through the printing press). It seems a debate of that kind would have made the Church look weak stooping to the level of a lowly monk who dare challenges Catholic hierarchy. I don't think Rome was prepared or inclined to debate its monopoly of power over Christendom in Europe. Afterall, it held dominion for 1000 years.
As a child, I was shaped by my Polish grandmother's view that Catholicism was the one and only true religious path. Hers was a very beautiful, devout, and decidedly pre-Vatican II version of the RCC. Upon attending Catholic school in the late 80s, I was blindsided by the modern ecumenical "Catholic-lite" church: yes, Catholicism is nice and lovely, but all faiths are equally valid and any good person can go to heaven regardless of belief. Even in my young mind, logic caused me to take the next leap: if long held beliefs and traditions were no longer mandatory and could be questioned, why not question the Bible and Christianity itself? Logically, Luther had just one more leap to go before casting out the whole of Christianity, and it's surprising he did not make it. Needless to say, in my adult years, I have become a secular humanist. Why do I write this then? Just as a warning to Catholics who would like to see their Church continue in the future that, if they keep discarding what makes their teachings unique in favor of ecumenicalism, young people will see little/no need to continue in the faith. Personally, even though I no longer believe, I would not like to see the Catholic Church fade into the sands of time if, for nothing else, it is one of the few sources of beauty and charity left in the Western world. But promoting the narrative that other forms of Christianity are equally valid will only succeed in pushing young people out the door. The Boomers, with their "you do your thing" philosophy, are not the future. If you wish to continue, find a way to make this special for young people, not just another option. Peace.
Thank you very much for responding to my post, Bishop Barron. I sincerely appreciate it and have enjoyed much of your work. I apologize in advance for the length of this post. Please know that any criticism comes from a place of concern. I have rewatched your video and appreciate that both you and Pope Francis are trying to bridge the divide between Protestants and Catholics in the name of peace and Christian brotherhood. The problem is, IMHO, that many doctrinal issues the Catholic Church holds dear are non-negotiable. Such as, transubstantiation is justified by John 6:53. If that is true, then the Catholics and Orthodox Christians are the only ones with the true form of Communion and need to preach to their Protestant brothers to rejoin the true Church. Is the Pope truly the Rock and Vicar of Christ on Earth? If he is, then by disobeying his authority, Protestants are in conflict with the very thing they hold most dear (the Bible). Should a priest be in the mold of Christ (male, preferably single) or can a priest be anyone literate enough to read the Bible? Is Mary truly forever Virgin and full of Grace, or is she simply the tool used by God to bring Christ into the world, no less a sinner than anyone else? These issues matter greatly, and the answers depend on whether one sees the Catholic Church as THE Church or whether he views it simply as another denomination as Protestantism holds. No matter how you cut it, the answer can't be both. In addition, I can't get on board with whitewashing Luther himself. Having read much about the man, he seems to have begun as a sincere, though horrifically troubled and neurotic, monk who wanted to correct abuses in the Church. However, once the German nobles flocked to him (for the same reason Henry VIII's nobles embraced his Reformed Church: the seizure of land and wealth from the Church made them immensely wealthy), he became convinced that he alone had the one true Gospel and was restoring true Christianity. As such, he fully believed that the Jews would convert en masse once they heard his Truth. Once they did not, he showed his true colors and advocated punishments against Jews which were only distinguishable from Hitler's Final Solution in the sense that Luther would have allowed Jewish converts to live (though one imagines under severe scrutiny for the rest of their lives). As someone who has Jewish ancestry in my relatively recent lineage, I can't just excuse this as being a product of his time. No, Luther's anti-Semitism laid the groundwork for the Third Reich. Not to mention the fact (which many Protestants overlook) that Luther was as much, if not more, critical of fellow "reformers" as the Catholic Church. Clearly, the man loved power and did not want a challenge to his reign as the Pope of Protestantism. Viewing this from a historical prospective, I think it's fine time to acknowledge that the Protestant Reformation may have been the single worst event in Western history. By dividing Christendom and irrevocably weakening the Church, it set the stage for many of the ills which seek to overwhelm the West today: militant Islam, fundamentalist cults, rise in Nationalism (which fueled two world wars), Communism and extreme Capitalism (both of which reduce human value to one's labor), destruction of the family, etc. What so many secular professors seek to avoid acknowledging is the fact that Western civilization was created almost entirely by the Catholic Church and without Her influence, may cease to exist. I feel this is a real threat considering that the path the RCC has been on for the past few decades seems quite similar to that of the Anglican/Episcopalian church: trying so hard to accommodate modernity and discard traditions which may strike the outsider as outdated. As the stats have shown, this more inclusive attitude has done little more than to empty the pews. Personally, I think the world would be a much darker place without the Catholic Church and want to see Her continue well into the future. Thank you for reading and sorry about the length. Peace.
With all due respect, Your Grace, I did not mean to imply that you stated that all faiths are equally valid (sorry if I did not make that clear in the responses). What I meant was that, in a quest to create greater Christian unity (a noble goal), it seems that more traditional forms of Christianity (Catholicism and Orthodoxy) have been willing to downplay or even discard doctrines/facets of their faiths instead of challenging Protestants and radical sects to read and accept the Biblical justifications for the doctrines. For example: transubstantiation, the Immaculate Conception, the papacy, etc. Either these doctrines are true and worth defending (and possibly dying for) or they are simply nice little cultural remnants and can be discarded at will. If the former, Catholics, in the name of tolerance, do a grave disservice by not guiding their Protestant brethren to the true Church. If the latter, then why even form churches at all? One can simply read the Bible at home. Perhaps you can see the danger in the logical conclusion of such thought. Peace.
Cassandra'sCurse Well written. I think deep down inside you are still much more RCC than you realize, which is not a bad thing. I'm pretty sure that the good and beautiful parts of your education and upbringing are deeply rooted in your soul even decades upon decades later and continue to implicitly and explicitly influence how you walk out your life every day. So act with love in all things.....
Am I missing something? Do I perceive that you are saying Paul's inspirational writings about Grace Only are inadequate; even though Paul was selected by Jesus to preach "Grace" to the Gentiles, uncircumcised? Interestingly enough, Jesus gave the Apostles direction to minister only to Lost Sheep of Isreal, circumcised.
I didn't learn much, other than that I'm still a Lutheran, and why I remain one. When you examine the horrible doctrine of the current pope, it becomes clear why the Solas are important. Do you put your trust in man or God?
@@sweynforkbeard8857 "the pillar and bulwark of the truth is the church of the living God", 1Tim3:15. Sola scriptura is not the pillar of thruth, so you may want to reconsider your essential doctrine which is unbiblical. Not saying you need to become Catholic, but sola scriptura and sola fide are not in the scripture at least not with the word "sola". Anywone who knows the bible is aware of this and you should too.
sweyn forkbeard- Have u ever researched the life of Martin Luther?? He’s a horrible horrible evil man..and he changed words and rejected 11 books from the Bible to fit his ideology.. So, who do u put your faith on, the Lord or Martin Luther ??
@@ameliadelcastillo5424 Luther was merely a person who can only be judged thought the lens of his time that he lived in. Judging historical figures by todays standards is foolish. The followings of the faithful in the Lutheran tradition do not depend in any way on the writings of Luther, other than he wrote a few hymns we like to sing on occasion. What he wrote about Jews, or the Turk is hardly a concern of anyone in the church, nor is it a part of Lutheran doctrinal practices. The teachings we do adhere to is the need to be saved through faith (Sola fide and Sola gratia), and the need to read scripture for ourselves (Sola scriptura), and not depend too much on human sources, or popular societal dogma to be confused as a source of spirituality. You can see this issue in many churches (including the Lutheran ELCA), so I don't see what the Pope is doing as a lot different from what is happening in a lot of churches today. I just don't agree with it, nor do I view the Pope as any sort of spiritual leader.
When ever I Read Luther's documents I can Feel God's presence I can tell Luther Was used by God to Bring Back the one true Church Jesus Christ founded Reading the Gospels along side Luthers writting's is why i am know a Lutheran God lead me to the Lutheran church and I been to many different churches and i can say God's presence i have found to being the strongest within theLlutheran church.
Bishop Barron I love how you approach things so calmly, so cool, so scholarly. You are the medicine to the reactionaries in the Church - a voice of temperance in a wilderness of insecure ultra Conservatives. Simultaneously not falling into the pitfalls and indifferece of the far left. Catholics should be neither everything goes far left or reactionary far right - we should be temperate centrists like Bishop Barron - people who can see both the good and the bad in all things. To canonize Luther and view him as a saint is wrong. To demonize Luther and view him as a devil is wrong. To view Luther as a flawed and sinful man who had both good and bad qualities and led to things both good and bad - that is the wise and charitable Catholic Christian Way. That is the Way of holy and wise Bishops like Pope Francis, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, and Bishop Barron.
If it wasn't Luther it would have been someone else. Jeez, you can hardly put half a dozen people in a room for 10 minutes before they disagree. So 1500 years of holding it together(excluding orthodox) was bloody miraculous!
Bishop Barron, as a practicing Lutheran I want to say thank you. Once for a personally unbiased, scholarly- based analysis of Luther, but more importantly as a Christian who is trying to sort through the noise and learn how to live as Christ intends us to. Before there was Catholic, before there was protestant, before the was anything else there was simply "Christian". That is my quest. Unfortunately it seems that for every question I finally find an answer to, two or three new questions arise so the more I learn the dumber I get. The good thing about Luther is he challenged and he started the hard conversations and he made people think. He spoke out of conviction and sincerity and a true effort to correct what he considered a wrong, and it helps immensely to compare his actions not only to other church doctors but in an historical context as well. He wasn't anti-Catholic right out of the gate. At the same time from what I have learned about him is he could be quite the yutz and was far from a perfect man or a perfect Christian so I don't swallow blindly all his teachings.
Catholic means Universal. That’s why Paul went everywhere he could to spread the gospel. And sent letters to all communities and so did every other apostle. The twelve apostles we all killed for preaching the gospel and spreading the good news.
@@LandaverdeJR Catholic means universal, but the context of how this word is used and intended in conjunction with the Roman creed makes that interpretation problematic. Church history under emperor Constantine is a bloody one, connected to oppression, murder, blackmail and coersion. It is safe to say that, in the common and modern tongue, "catholic" can no longer be used apart from its historical context: to refer to the church after the council of Nicea.
@@a-sheepof-christ9027 church history in our times is problematic too. Just look at the news 📰 or out recent history world war II. Would you say the word “Christian” is not linked to world war II. Nuclear weapons are linked to Christian nations like USA and Rusia. That’s problematic too. We have more than 100,000 Christian churches all preaching different doctrines. Non-Christians are so confused 🤔 by it. The truth has been diluted to the point where no one can claim they have the whole truth. Except the catholic church and Orthodox. 1 Timothy 3,15 say that church is “the pillar and foundation of the truth.” But which one?
@@LandaverdeJR The truth is to be believe in Jesus Christ whatever you are a: -Catholic -Orthodox -Armenian Apostolic Church -Coptic -Baptist -Calvinist -Methodist -Pentecostal
Can you say "yes to both Luther and Trent"? "Both/and" sounds progressive but is not possible when the two positions are mutually exclusive. I guess the deeper question is whether or not Luther and Roman Catholicism are compatible on the key issues of monergism vs. synergism in salvation, works and grace, and even more basically, Biblical interpretation. As an aside, Ryrie's book is titled "The Radicals that made the Modern World", not "The Faith......"
Well, I explicitly argued that they are not compatible. I opined that Luther's solas might be read as over the top expressions of an experience of grace.
Thanks. I'm not saying that there is not compatibility although I suspect that at bottom there are impasses that cannot be breached (certainly many millions of words have been spilled on this topic). I do support efforts such as "Evangelicals and Catholics Together". I assume you must have commented or written about ECT and would be interested in what you have to say about that effort. How much is common ground (just using different vocabulary or coming from different angles) and how much is complete incompatibility?
I explicitly denied that one can say yes to both Luther and Trent at the doctrinal level. I said clearly that Trent was right in its critique of Luther's teaching. I was merely suggesting that we might take Luther's language in a different register.
Interesting, as a Scandinavian, brought up Protestant, yet an artist; I may see things off things missed. Here is my version. Luther was part of a period where only elites read books. The masses was in educated, and specific in Latin. So, as the priest then held sermons in Latin, only elites could follow. The masses were transfixed on all the beautiful rendering paintings , mureals and sculptures for their faith. Of course roundly exploited by overlords, sometimes priest, abuse off real estates as donations, willing or not. So a counter revolution was brewing. And, a nun shared Luther's didafaction. One, it would be" healthier if ministers off faith, ( some) married for obvious reasons. Aside, my biggest take away was his insight, sermons should be held in the local speech, so all could receive the word off God! And, he began to print the Bible in German. Now, phesants was slowly becoming educated, to reading, analizing, being in charge off their lives. This to me, was the biggest most amazing revolution for mankind in the west, later elsewhere. People owned their lives and could so to speak relate one on one with the word off God. But, as an Artist, we are aside so very blessed with all the incredible interpetations off the Gospel to this day. We, I though Protestant, studied Education in a College ( my choice), Saint Elizabeth College , Convent, NJ., Under the Sisters of Charity, with whom I connected and have very fond memories. Why, I wanted to know how the opposite Isle in the Gospel looked at life! We, are all today, going through re-evaluations, and how is it Jesus says don't look for the splinter in your brothers eye, you may have a beam in your own. The Cradle off our faith has Manny facets, faces, but above it all stand the Trinity for us all. For some the one God and disciples. But, the Ten commandments are so very clear and non negotiable. As, love thy neighbor, as they self. May we reach that some day. God Bless Bishop.🇩🇰🇺🇸🦅💜. Algorithms ...un educated...thy...
Luther hated Jews and advocated for their destruction. He also altered the words of Holy Scripture to suit his new theology which was inspired by his extreme scrupulousness.
Yes, Luther was in love with Christ, but was also a widely recognized Professor of Theology with a tremendous understanding of the scriptures. With this in mind, it could be argued that he had a better balance on reality than what is proposed in this video. The council of Trent is a debatable source here as they were obviously out to counter Luther’s theology and their reaction as such was predictable. Further to this, does one really want teaching from one who is not in love with God? Anyway, a good video Bishop Barron! Enjoyed it. Thank you.
Committed Lutheran here - grateful to the bishop for being fair minded and true to his confession (though I agree with Kris Luther was better balanced and it's reasonable to ascribe slogans he approved of with teenage romanticism). For me, Trent was devastated by Martin Chemnitz's critique and has never sufficiently responded. Chemnitz thoroughly goes through Scripture and church fathers to demonstrate their teachings aligning with those of the Book of Concord. Ambrose: "But he who is righteous has righteousness given to him because he was justified from the washing of baptism. Faith, therefore is that which frees through the blood of Christ, because he is blessed 'whose transgression is forgiven, who sin is covered'". Augustine: "By the law we fear God, by faith we hope in God"
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr Sadly true for some, but hopefully not the vast majority. I guess Protestants also have to check if they love their scriptures more than God. Anything can become a God, even something pure and holy.
@@krisjustin3884 I agree somewhat about the scriptures, but at the same time, without the scriptures we'd know nothing about God and all have Hindu steaks in us and be way off. What do we look to? If the Catholic Church didn't have the scriptures to at some level keep them accountable, they'd be further off than Mormons by this point.
With Bishops like this, no wonder there is such confusion within the Church, and hence no young people attending mass. Young people want and deserve more. My own son has just started to attend the Traditional Latin Mass as he said there was no substance, instruction or meaning in the Novus ordo mass I know from experience however, that Bishop Baron and his followers are not prepared to listen. Hence forth there has to be a parting of the ways.
Say yes to Heresy? Go back to the foundations of the Catholic Church. Certain pillars need not change. Did you forget also that later in Dylan,s life he admits to a partnership with the Devil...sums it up I think.
@@brianincremona7121 Yes? I don't think is just my idea. the whole point was that making baseless accusations can be done to anyone or anything and it does not make it true. The only thing that shows is that you want it to be true.
Luther was a biblical scholar. And he read the Fathers. From the Fathers.... Ambrose (340?-396), “How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23). Athanasius (300?-375), “The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth. (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.) The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear anything in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written,” (Athanasius, Exhort. ad Monachas). “Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (Athanasius, De Synodis, 6). We ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures...Let us then speak nothing concerning the Holy Ghost but what is written; and if anything be not written, let us not busy ourselves about it. The Holy Ghost Himself spoke the Scriptures; He has also spoken concerning Himself as much as He pleased, or as much as we could receive. Be those things therefore spoken, which He has said; for whatsoever He has not said, we dare not say. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4.17ff) What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words. (Gregory of Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Book 12. On the Trinity, To Eustathius.) Let us not therefore carry about the notions of the many, but examine into the facts. For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do not trust to others, but refer this to figures and calculation; but in calculating upon facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others; and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things; which may we all obtain, through the grace and love towards men of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.” (John Chrysostom, Homily on 2 Corinthians, 13.4) For the reasonings of any men whatsoever, even though they be [true Christians], and of high reputation, are not to be treated by us in the same way as the canonical Scriptures are treated. We are at liberty, without doing any violence to the respect which these men deserve, to condemn and reject anything in their writings, if perchance we shall find that they have entertained opinions differing from that which others or we ourselves have, by the divine help, discovered to be the truth. I deal thus with the writings of others, and I wish my intelligent readers to deal thus with mine. (St Augustine, Letters, 148.15)
Rosicrucianism didn't arise until after Luther's death. Nothing Luther wrote had anything to do with Rosicrucianism. Anything "Lutheran" about Rosicrucianism is only by radical reinterpretation, of which Luther would have been horrified.
iraje hall he wasn’t interpreting the Bible however he pleased. He was very much Augustinian in his approach through and through. He regularly appealed to the church fathers. My point is to say that to say Rosicrucianism is Lutheran both misunderstands rosicrucianism and Lutheranism altogether. Rosicrucianism was a fringe group, who embraced pseudo-gnostic views about human nature, and taught their methods as a means to realize your own divine nature. The Lutheran tradition teaches that all humans are entirely fallen, corrupt in their nature, and require God to intervene by saving grace in order to regenerate a person. Nothing we do can make it happen. Rosicrucianism is fundamentally works based and founded on principles altogether at odds with Christianity. In any case, Luther had nothing whatsoever to do with Rosicrucianism. He died before it was invented.
Bishop Barron, I notice quite a few of your Reformation-related videos sorta center around Luther. Have you done any pieces on Calvin, or would you consider doing so?
Believers need to expand in thinking both with mind and heart. This requires personal choice, time, sacrifices. So as to grasp as much as possible of the full counsel (will) of God.
I see parallels between Martin Luther’s dramatic realization of grace alone (i.e. I cannot ever measure up on my own, and thank you Lord for granting me grace rather than pure justice!) and St. Therese of Lisieux’s Little Way (i.e. I cannot ever measure up on my own, and thank you Lord for extending me Divine Mercy rather than Divine Justice!)
![เจ็บที่ยังฮัก - ม่อน วรวิทย์ [ Official Mv ] จอนนี่มิวสิค](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KALIGSRSjFs/mqdefault.jpg)
If it's any consolation, Bishop Barron's reflection on Luther is perhaps the most insightful I've heard of the heart of Protestantism, that obviously extending to Ryrie. As someone writing a sermon myself right now, it is entirely around the journey back into the Father's embrace. And how that moment of embrace, arguably the one Luther felt, changes everything. To find yourself in front of a loving and faithful Father and to know, in humility, that all I have to give Him was His in the first place, that I am alive and am able to be with Him in a meaningful way. With all due respect to call that heresy is to value the form of Catholicism with a subdued regard to the heart of the universal message of Christianity. That the criticism of the three Solas still doesn't mean empathy can't be extended to the heart of Luther's (let's call it, for lack of a better term) conversion. I think that is all Bishop is trying to say.
Pfuetz4 Bless you! You’re one of the very few on this forum who got my point.
@@BishopBarron I appreciate your perspective! I'm not so I can fully articulate why I'm not a Catholic, but hearing someone finally empathize with what I consider the informing spirit/perspective/idea of my faith (without much explicit studying of Luther)--it's refreshing. I reckon you'll see many more honest protestants at your table with this message, for whatever that is worth!
enjoyed listening to this bishop. I still identify as protestant but im starting to enjoy the process of growing and learning about the many aspects to our faith in Jesus.
*R Catholicism has nothing to do with God and His Words. R Catholic Church contradicts Scriptures in every possible ways!*
1. Catholics say Mary was sinless. But BIBLE says Mary offered a sinner's offering. She was a sinner. Bible says Mary needed a Saviour. Lk 2:23-24, Lev 12:6-8, Rom 3:10.
2. Catholics say clergies must be celibate. Yet BIBLE says Peter (supposed R Church first leader) had mother in law. Bible says celibacy is not a qualification for clergies. Mat 8:14-15, Mar 1:30-31, Luk 4:38-39.
3. Catholics say Mary was forever virgin. Yet BIBLE says Jesus had brothers and sisters. Mary was not perpetually virgin. Mk 6:3, Mat 13:55, Mat 27:56, Mar 6:3, Mar 15:40, Mar 15:47.
4. Catholics say confess to R priests in a box. BIBLE says nothing about confessing to priests in a box. Bible says confess to GOD only. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6, Romans 10:9-10.
5. Catholics say drink of the physical blood of Jesus. Yet OT and NT both say do not drink blood. Acts 15, Lev 7:26.
6. Catholics say pray to passed on Mary and "saints". Yet BIBLE says do not contact the dead. NT Church did not record a single case of NT believers asking passed on saints to pray for them. Deut 18:11, Isaiah 8:19.
7. Catholics make and bow down to statues. BIBLE says do not bow down to graven images (statues). Deut 4, Exo 20:4-5.
8. Catholics sprinkles “holy water”. But NT Church of the Bible mentioned nothing about “holy water”. There was no record of any Apostles sprinkling “holy water” on believers. Catholics claimed “holy water” came from OT. Yet Num 5:17 says “holy water” was water used to test adulterous women in OT temple. Hardly the same. Those were for Old Covenant Jews. Not New Testament Christians.
9. Catholics say Peter was pope - bishop of all bishops. Yet BIBLE says Peter was just a leader of the Jerusalem Church. Bible says nothing of the office of bishop of bishops. Gal 2:9, Mat 16:18.
10. Catholics say there is a seat of Peter. Yet BIBLE says nothing about it. Jesus said “not to lord over others”.
11. Catholics has clergy priesthood. Bible says clergy priesthood was done away with in New Testament. There is no clergy priesthood in NT. Heb 7:27, 9:12, 10:10.
12. Catholics preaches Works Salvation (faith + good works + partake R sacraments + submit to R pontiff + be in R Church + devote to Mary = to be saved). Yet Bible says “believe in Jesus to be saved”. Bible says Works Salvation is cursed. Gal 1:8-9. Acts 16:30-31, John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10.
13. Catholics says they must do Penance to atone for their sins. Yet Bible says repent, confess and sins will be forgiven. Catholic Bible changes the word “repentance” in NT into “penance”. Original Greek NT does not use or mean the word penance. Penance = work to atone for sins. Repentance = change of heart. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6.
14. Catholics say Mary went straight to heaven without dying. Yet Bible says nothing about it.
15. Catholics say Islam and Christianity have the same GOD. Yet Islam doesn't believe in death and resurrection of Jesus and Trinity.
Yawn .... Such boring and over tired protestant takes. You've got to pervert everything the church says to come to the conclusions you did, but that's to be expected since you've got no magisterium.
Hey Ethanjsc, three years later, do you still identify as a protestant?
@@jediv3381Like the Devil when he tempted Our Lord in the desert, you're a heretic perverting Sacred Scripture.
@@AlbertMagnvs AS of now, I still do, thanks for the follow up Albert
My father was Norwegian Lutheran!
My mother was Irish Catholic!
Interesting upbringing.
Went to Catholic Church but had father questioning RC church?!! Had lots of conversations and laughs I may say!! Thank goodness for Irish humour in our family!! 😂
James also says in this passage, "Faith without works is useless" (2:20), "Faith is completed by works" (2:22) and "Faith without works is dead" (2:26). James also says, "See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone" (2:24). This is actually the only place in the Bible where the words faith and alone are found together, and it is saying that a person is not justified by faith alone.
Martin Luther knew that the Bible did not support his theory of sola fide, so he actually tried to take the book of James out of the New Testament, as well as the books of Hebrews, Jude, and Revelations. He later added them back after receiving heat from his peers, but referred to the book of James as an "epistle of straw." He also added the word alone to Romans 3:28 in his translation of the Bible so that it would read that we are justified by our faith alone.
Mark Peter the "epistle of straw" according to Luther.
I agree with you Mark. Luther could not be inspired by an encounter with God, because God does not contradict himself. We have the example of thousand of saints, really mystics, they never denied the teaching of the church nor its tradition.
How about 'we are not saved BY good works, but FOR good works'
Mark, I agree with the scriptures that you have quoted, however I think that Lutherans and Roman Catholics both have a misconception of each other. I don’t write this to start an argument or a dissension between us, and I will conform to your ideas if I cannot rebuke you.
The New Revised Catholic Version of the Bible translates Romans 3:28 as such: “For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.” If we are not being justified by the works prescribed by the law, what are we justified by? Luther translated this passage “By faith alone,” because it makes philosophical sense.
Now, Lutherans in no way believe that works are not important. We know and hold fast that when the end comes, God will judge us according to every good and bad thing that we have done. Also, we believe that when one has faith in Jesus Christ, it creates good works. By the blessing of the Holy Spirit, we may finally produce good works according to the Law.
Now, on the other hand, many Lutherans believe that Catholics believe that they are only saved by works. This is not certainly true, as we know. Correct me if I am wrong, for I don’t have that good of a memory, but I believe that during the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church stated: “Only those, by the grace of God, can do good works.” Of coarse, I am paraphrasing, but I think I expressed the main point. If anything, you could say that Catholics believe in something called “Grace Alone.”
I hope that God blesses you, and that peace may forever be held within your heart. Amen.
paul justification through the grace of God lest we might gain the impression that we were able to do it!
Bishop Barron offers a very fair and nuanced perspective of Luther here. It speaks to Barron's scholarship and integrity that he presents this objective picture of a man whom many other Catholics would be quick to simply dismiss without consideration.
There are a lot of liberal Catholics like myself or even nonpracticing ones who see him as a hero. There is a pretty thin line between us and Lutherans and, given the politically-motivated purge of left-wing Catholics in America right now by the American Church, many ultimately do become Lutheran. I have come to see Luther merely as a galvanized and militant version of St. Francis of Assisi, perhaps even someone God used to punish the Catholic Church for its blatant hypocrisy and evil during the 1500s and before then. Both were told or felt they needed to reform the Church. Francis did beautiful things but did not succeed on such a grand scale... Luther ended up creating the modern world due to proclaiming a hyper-charged version of that message at a time when technology and politics could carry the message to devastating and seemingly irreparable consequences. God in the Old Testament put his people through similar events and timespans of disarray and disunity to correct them, so it's no wonder he would use someone like Luther. Luther is a hero and I hope he is in paradise.
As our people lose faith in so many earthly institutions, the cause of Christian unity is more important than ever. Keep up the good work!
Truth is essential. Unity is nice.
I am an evangelical Protestant and lover of Luther. I appreciate your irenic, fair spirit, and I enjoy listening to you.
Thanks for the opportunity to allow me learn a new word - Irenic
Convert to Christianity instead
I’m Lutheran and I enjoy watching your videos. I have understood that faith and works are sort of hand and hand. If you truly have faith in Jesus as your Lord and Savior, then good works can’t help but glow out of you. If you have no good works , then one must seriously question your faith in God. As Jesus said you can judge a tree by the fruit it bears.
Me again, I meant to say “flow” out of you not glow.🤦♀️
@@deneentorkelson6131 Protestants and Catholics alike struggle with sin - they don't go around "not being able to help having good works flowing out of them".
Deneen Torkelson listen to Luther, here’s the proof , God says not by works lest Ye boast , pride is what God hates most as that was what caused Lucifer to fall, click on link. www.google.com.au/search?q=kjv+grace+through+faith&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari
Gary Jaensch Luther blasphemed
Gavin Grinny Paul when called Saul was killing people, persecuted Gods people,, I don’t know the meaning of your comment?
Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?
Well said , 👏
Thank you for your fair portrayal of Luther and honesty!
You truly try to see God and his working through him.
“What unites us in Christ is greater than what divides us.” Pope Francis in 2016 when he welcomed German Lutherans in Rome.
When I was growing up in the Christian faith I thought of these mantras, by grace alone, by faith alone, we're just emphatic sayings in order to give God as much glory as possible. I thought "well I do have to do a bunch of stuff, but God is so good and awesome I'm just gonna say it's all Him!" But thanks be to God when I realized these were not just emphatic expressions, and not just the outcries of a young lover. Once I saw that salvation was truly by God's grace "alone," and through faith "alone" it changed everything for me. And it changed everything for Luther too.
As a Lutheran/Calvinist whose always believed that if you don’t have works you’re going to hell, I’m starting to realize maybe I’m more Catholic than I realize
You actually go to hell BECAUSE you have works; evil works. You can do good works too, but even atheists can do good works.
In order to believe that good works can keep you out of hell, you’d have to accept that an atheist can go to heaven. How could a person who denies God’s existence possibly go to heaven?
@@sly8926 Bruh we don't preach "Sola Opus" (Salvation by works alone). We teach that you need a faith with works. That's what the bible teaches: "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone... For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead." (James 2:24,26)
@@a_Catholic_Ant James is not a swearing how one is saved. He’s answering how you can TELL one is saved. If there are no good works that you can see, that person is obviously not saved. But there can be no good works without faith. There can be no salvation without faith. And faith alone saves you. Ephesians 2:8-9
@@sly8926 This verse seems to be a condemnation of Pelagianism if read closely, that you are saved by yourself and not by God. Both Catholics and Protestants condemn this heresy. How do I know it's talking only about Pelagianism? It says "and this is not your own doing". The works talked about in the last part is talking about how our works doesn't earn salvation. Obedience is impossible without God. However, how we act can affect salvation. For example, one of the clearest condemnations of homosexuality also supports the Catholic position of mortal sin (sins that if you commit will damn you if you don't repent in confession). 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."
Our journey is to be better. To get closer to perfection. We will never be perfect. We will try. We will fail but we will learn from all those who came before us. God bless this world. We journey on. We get closer to God.
I love listening to this Bishop even though Im not Catholic. To be honest Im caught in the fence between Evangelicals and Catholics. As times I feel like going to RCIA classes. Yet, as an example of my hesitation is, I keep reading about being judged about our works - good and bad - yet even in Psalm 103:12 my sins will be removed from me ".....as far as the east is from the west." One could argue that the east is at the heals of the west, but the next verse talks about God's compassion towards His children. How compassionate is God if He doesnt forget our sins as long as we fear Him?
On the flip side of the coin is my paradigm regarding "work". As far as "works" go, to me if Peter decided not to step out of the boat and just say, "Yes, God, I have faith in You but if You dont mind I ll just stick it out here safely in the boat." Where is the faith if you dont work it out to step out of the boat? Then yes, such faith is dead!
Now you can see my dilemma.
Anyone else feels this way or am I doomed?
From my Catholic point of view: We're in this hole, covered with mud and muck (original sin.) Jesus throws us a rope - he's paid for us sins so we can get out. Every good thing we do and say (works) however small, pushes us a higher up the rope. Every bad thing weighs us down and makes us slip down again.
God wants us to succeed. For those who do, in His mercy He forgets that He ever saw their sins and how much they struggled on the way up.
I hope this helps. God bless.
You understand works well. The example of Peter stepping out of the boat is exactly the understanding I have about works. Don't be Catholic.
@@annettea4334 We are not on a rope. Dead or alive is a binary thing. So are you dead or alive?
Pray this prayer . >> DEAR JESUS, YOU KNEW I COULD NEVER DO ENOUGH GOOD THINGS TO DESERVE HEAVEN SO YOU DIED ON A CROSS SO I CAN BE FORGIVEN. PLEASE SEND THE HOLY SPIRIT TO HELP ME BECOME MORE LIKE THE PERSON YOU WANT ME TO BE.
You don’t need to walk with religion. Believers walk with Christ.
I love your discussion on ML. When I read a biography on ML… I was also struck by his 100% love of God and Jesus. But one thing he also seemed focused on was how the church(Pope hierarchy) was grasping the power of….who forgives sin. When God frees the slaves from Egypt…there is a parallel to what ML is looking at. Freedom of the individual…ML studies scripture and concludes…the individual has a direct pipeline to Jesus (God to Jews)… the sins have been forgiven….no humans necessary. (No middleman, no indulgences). I know nothing about this subject… but I was really taken in by ML.. his fiery personality and bravery for the time he lived in. He was devoted also to Paul’s writings (so he didn’t dislike ALL Jews), he had quite a sharp tongue… but I think Bishop Barron you hit on the reason for that… he was in love with God. ♥️✝️
I would like to know what is the goal of modern Ecumenism.
Return protestants back to the Church, or search for a compromise between the two?(something political)
I'm also concerned about some of the statements made by the Holy Father, in the "ecumenical dialogue" He seems to emphasize more common social action rather than search for the Truth.. doing exactly the contrary of what Pope Benedict did.
Could you explain the actual position of the Holy See? thank you
Mostly the latter from the view both are Christians and that's what's most important, though I can't exclude the possibility some individuals within the Catholic church might favor the first, and some individuals within the protestant church might prefer reforming the Catholic church to be become more like the protestant church.
BlacksmithTWD I like both :( can we just keep them both. But I love the old Latin mass and the tradition.
@@Oo7Hola
I'm not an authority on either, but both are still practiced, just visit the right places at the right time and you can still enjoy both.
Will find answers in towardsovietamerica.com by communist William Z. Foster, “School of darkness” by Dr. Bella V. Dodd & “Good Bye, Good Men” by Michael S. Rose.
Jerry Uallera This all began a long time ago. Read about Paul VI, Francis is just 2.0 Paul. Heresy’s been around since Vatican 2.
Yes to both, and Amen to a step forward in the ecumenical conversation!
Hi, Bishop - as a baptized Lutheran I enjoyed your perspective on Luther. I always interpreted his increased vitriol against the upper clergy and church itself as his "born again" moment, where he was able to see Christ more clearly than he ever had before. That said, he indeed rebelled against the Catholic establishment and many of us still follow his liturgical blueprint for the worship of the holy trinity - very similar but in contrast to our Catholic brethren. My question of late has been this: Are we Christians nearing a point where current societal trends are forcing us to defend our positions of faith in outspoken ways similar to Martin Luther's outward criticism of the church? In your opinion are various denominations nearing or have already reached a point where we can present a united front and loudly proclaim God's presence in a world that turns away from it?
Exactly! I think I'm hearing you say that in this time in the history of the world, the last thing we need is bickering between Christians who for the most part believ the same things. The great commission of making beliwvers of all nations baptising them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit!
That should be our paramount mission! Now is not the time to create stumbling blocks for people to come to faith in Jesus Christ and his saving work.
The Pope, Bishops, Priests, Pastors, Deacons, and associate pastors need to teach and preach THE Truth. Not watered down, feel good sermons. Teach and preach the good news of salvation but also preach and teach about the truth of evil in the world and the truth of Heaven, Hell, the Devil, and his demons. Preach and teach the truth. His name is Jesus Christ. There is truth in no other. AMEN.
@@NCWMedicGreat comment. I feel the same way. Pray that we all unite as believers in Jesus.
Hi Bishop Barron PLEASE READ, I'm currently watching your series on catholicism. I've always admired this series, thank you. I am born and raised catholic and admire the peace that fills me when I am at mass, retreats, and ccd. My brother is attending school in Indiana to be a lutheran pastor. He will be up there for 4 yrs. with his wife(shes lutheran) and my nephew (he's 10 mths.) I love my brother, his wife, and my nephew with all my heart. I know that they will be okay because they love christ so much. Yet this has caused confusion for my family. I don't know exactly what I am asking you I think I just wanted you to know. I typed this before watching the video.
Bishop Robert Barron It is with respect that I make my next comment, how can we call an "experience of grace" to something that led Fr. Martin Luther to reject the Church as a sacrament of salvation?
Santa Escritura Experiences of God can be misinterpreted and inadequately explained. That doesn't mean they weren't in fact experiences of God.
Bishop Robert Barron I think you have a point. but on the other hand Martin Luther not only interpreted and explained his new ideas, but he also rejected and "refuted" the teachings of the Church misleading thousands of souls, even until this day. I never thought about the "Solas" of Luther as expressions of love, but as denials of Catholic doctrine: "Sola Fide" a denial of the necessity of good works for final justification, "Sola Scriptura" a denial of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium as binding authorities for all Christians. In any event I know you know these things very well. Thank you for taking time to graciously respond to my comment Bishop, I really appreciate it. Thank you again!
And I grant as much! I said that Trent was right in criticizing the Solas from a doctrinal perspective. But can we find absolutely nothing valuable in Luther's religious experience?!
Bishop Robert Barron Agreed! Thank you for taking time to reply Bishop!
Remember Luther never wanted to leave the church. He wanted to reform it and change it. To get rid of the abuses and corruption at the time. It was the Pope who excommunicated him. Luther was a faithful member of the Augustinian Order.
But how could the experience of Grace in the "Lutheran" sense be effectively drawn out in a manner that IS in conformity with the orthodox teaching?
Alex perhaps the only way it could work is simply by a more poetic and/or literary expression of our need for God and His grace. Clearly it is impossible to compromise on the Lutheran "sola" principles, but I think a good step forward would be to simply acknowledge how wonderfully important the saving grace of God is.
Then again, I don't see how the Catholic Church hasn't already expressed this fully, and perhaps it is protestants that need to recognize it in us.
Actually he's an extremely orthodox man, and if he wasn't, he wouldn't be my personal hero. He says nothing contradictory to Church teaching here and many times he has called out the issues created by Vat II. I believe that he is being a very clever evangelist in this video and I applaud him for reaching out to our protestant brothers and sisters.
Friend, did you even try to listen to what I argued?
Bishop Robert Barron Of course I did. I'm not questioning the premise of the video, just wondering about the mechanism behind how it could be played out in practice
Eric Davenport Watch his other videos. RESPECT for other viewpoints is not acquiescence.
Hey Bishop Barron, did you receive the silver play button yet from TH-cam?
Not yet!
Eric Davenport Friend, an honest question: is there in your opinion any value whatsoever to ecumenism? Vatican II and the last five Popes have all enthusiastically embraced it. But if Luther is nothing but a Hell-bound heretic, why would we even bother having discussions with Protestants?
Polonius: "My lord, I will use them according to their desert."
Hamlet: "God’s bodykins, man, much better. Use every man after his desert, and who should ’scape whipping? Use them after your own honor and dignity. The less they deserve, the more merit is in your bounty. "
Bishop Barron - Is the ultimate goal of ecumenism to bring everyone into the Catholic Church, or is it something else?
escabrosa1 The ultimate goal of the Church's entire life and activity is conversion.
@Bishop Robert Barron YES! I'm a new Catholic. I desperately want to bring Protestants back into the True Church. But until now, I've not heard an intellectually honest Catholic view of Luther. Thank you for looking at the truth about Luther. You did an excellent job here. (Although I would be severely unqualified to judge your work. But for what it's worth I think you did great and what you said was very helpful.) Yes I know Luther was wrong in many areas. And they were big. But by saying things like "he was a rebellious monk" (which until now was pretty much the only thing I could find Catholics saying about him), we are creating a completely unnecessary and I would almost say sinful wall for those Protestants that God is calling into the Catholic Church. I think that we have to look honestly at Luther, stand strong on the things that he was wrong on, but also recognize the things that he was right about. Some of the things that he was confronting the Church about were correct, as witnessed by the fact that the Church later changed on those things. His intention had not been to start a new branch of Christianity or to break from the Catholic Church. He wanted to reform within the Catholic Church. But the Pope not only excommunicated him but tried to have him killed. That's a big thing. Right there you have the rift. And again, I'm not trying to pretend that he wasn't wrong about a lot of things. I think that we need to genuinely look at the walls between us and Protestants, as you've done here with one of them, and honestly evaluate them. For example, we insist on saying that we pray to Mary. Ask your phone to give you the definition of pray. It says something along the line of begging for something from a deity. It might mention also an archaic meaning. And we know this. We laugh at Protestants who think that we're worshiping Mary and we say haven't you ever read Shakespeare? Well Shakespeare was centuries ago. The English language has changed since then. Yet we insist on using this archaic meaning of a word that we know causes Protestants to stumble. And I say that we know it because we shake our heads at them as if they're stupid because they don't understand the archaic meaning. WE LEAD THEM to believe that we are doing something that we know is heretical. (We lead them to think that we're worshiping Mary) I'm sorry but there's a problem with that. Why don't we just use modern English and say that we ask Mary to pray for us? As I said, I'm a new Catholic, so maybe I'm missing something. Maybe by saying it that way I'm losing some of true doctrine??? If so then I want to be corrected (hopefully kindly). I do not want to sacrifice any true doctrine. But from what I understand at this point, it would be accurate to say that we ask Mary to pray for us. We can express what we do without making it a stumbling block to Protestants that God might be calling into the Catholic Church. As someone who wants very very much to see Protestants brought back into the Catholic Church, this video was encouraging to me. Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.
I wish I can copy paste and save your comment it's so good.
A Catholic seminarian
Good points especially about Mary. Btw, Luther was a true follower of Her even though he was thinking about himself as a prophet and hated papacy and Catholic Church, which is bad as he hated the body of Christ and Him himself living Him at the same time. That's a crazy mixture. You're not wrong about the doctrine. Someone described the Church as the Noah's ark. It's the only way to salvation but due to so many animals on board it's filled with poop (our, the Church members' sins)
@@tommygun333 Yes! Since writing my comments I've found that he called her the mother of God. I still stand pretty much with what I said, but I've also learned a little bit more about that period. Luther split the church which was bad although that wasn't what he intended to do. However on the other side, there were religious and laity Who knew that there was a lot wrong in the church at the time. They quietly prayed and tried to be as godly as they could be. As a result, there was the Catholic Reformation. Wow! Fighting against something isn't necessarily the best way. Especially when we're talking about spiritual things. I so admire those people who prayed and worked on their personal Piet y. I think that's probably a lot more pleasing to God and it definitely yielded results.
@@tommygun333 PS - Thank you for sharing the Noah's ark illustration. I love that! And thank you for patiently encouraging a baby Catholic
Hi, how are you doing? I recommend reading the book of Galatians. And see what it says that justification is by faith alone and that adding works is a false gospel.
Sola good! 😂🙏 Thanks, Bishop Barron. A scholar & a gentleman to your core.
I am a cradle Lutheran. Thank you for your enlightening talk!
Thank you, Bishop Barron, for sharing your view on Luther. I am a baptist who has been reading Leo J. Trese's The Faith Explained, so as to understand the Catholic faith.
Well done, beautiful exegesis of the life of Luther who enlightened the world afresh with the Love and Mercy and Grace of God through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Only a Protestant can fully understand the Grace of God and who can write a hymn like, "Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me, l once lost but now l am found, blind but now l see ". 🙂👌👊👍
The composer sold slaves. How is that understanding the Grace of God? Love and mercy? Tell that to the Jews. Read the books which Martin Luther read, because they don’t exactly say ‘love’ as much as they do ‘hate’ .
@@BullShark-i2z
Yes clown he did sell slaves which is the whole point of the hymn he wrote.
Read the Council of Florence what the Catholic Church's view is about Jews which is no different to Luther an ex Catholic.
And while you about it study the Talmud to see what Jews think of our Lord Jesus Christ and Christians.
If you can't think critically then go for another vaccine and wear your mask.
@@mosesmanaka8109 That was just unnecessary nasty. Jews are God’s Chosen People. God told HIS Chosen People that HE will never stop Loving them. During His Passion, Jesus said “Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing. “ . Jesus told the Pharisees “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut the kingdom of heaven in front of people; for you do not enter it yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. ” . Anti-masker/anti-vaxxer arguments have zero credibility. Before vaccinations, the child mortality rate was much higher than it is now. Masks protect others. Do you really think that it’s the Christian thing to spread a deadly virus to someone with a compromised immune system? Do you actually have an argument? Or do you just have nasty remarks that even a 12 year old would call immature? Now, I would much prefer to have an intellectual discussion.
As a Lutheran, I would like to thank Bishop Barron for this and all of the other videos! I find them extremely interesting and I am enjoying them a lot.
Cuz he talked to your mouth.
I'm Lutheran lcms. Please do me a favor in the future. Don't invoke the name of my church. (A )you don't know what you're talking about. And (B )I hope you have a priest following you everywhere you go. The Bible says if you look at a woman. With lust in your eyes you've already committed it. Just the way we think of offends Yahweh. You're obviously not conservative Lutheran are you? Or maybe you just never payed attention . Again please label yourself as non-denominational from from now on. A true Lutheran doesn't speak the way you speak. Good day to you.
covert
I found the video very informative As a convert from Evangelical to Catholic church I have been trying to study the histories and mindset of the different theologies. Can you recommend any media or literature that can help break it down so I can have a hope of mentally digesting?
I would suggest looking for material by Dr. Brant Pitre. He also has many great TH-cam videos if you do a search for Catholic Productions.
Karl Keating's Catholicism and Fundamentalism is a great overview of the idfferences between Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholicism. Saved my faith a few years back.
It might be good to listen to Pints with Aquinas by Matt Fradd. It's a podcast where he breaks down St Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiæ and translates it into an explanation of the varying perspectives of the Christian faith, while addressing certain questions which may be asked from a non-Catholic perspective
I can see how a few pints would help before tackling St. Aquinas.
I think John Henry Newman is one of the most enlightening authors in this area. Apologia Pro Vita Sua and Essay on Development of Christian Doctrine showcase the protestant side just as well as they do the Catholic one as he was the most important Anglican figure of the 19th century.
A quote from your hero:
“Did I not tell you earlier that a Jew is such a noble, precious jewel that God and all the angels dance when he farts? And if he were to go on to do something coarser than that, they would nevertheless expect it to be regarded as a golden Talmud”.
Here's some telling quotes by Martin Luther as well: “If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.”
“Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.”
“If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham”
“To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” - “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs”
“It is more important to guard against good works than against sin.”
“Good works are bad and are sin like the rest.”
Tha's why thousands of Catholics leave the church, because our pastors don't embraced the true anymore, they want to be inclusive and nice rather than loyal and truthful to our faith.
Juan Martinez
True
Hopefully someday, the clergy would have the passion, and energy that is like a valiant knight onward to his quest with unwavering loyalty.
True
Bishop Barron used some Interesting terminology referring to Luther, here I added my reflections on his terms.
Crackling - I tend to associate with flames.
Squinting - A difficulty in seeing something
Fighter pugnacious - In a priest? should only be to defend God and the Church not attack it
Lover - Luther fell in love with himself not God. . St Michael was both a Fighter and lover when he defended God.
So over the top - in love with himself that he put his ideas over everyone, removed parts of the bible and thought so highly of himself that he inserted Alone into scripture. That sound like the Vice of Pride.
Juan Martinez g
leaving the Church (true church - catholic), is like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. you confuse inclusive with the term "welcoming ". Paul said I became all things to all people so that some would be saved (inclusive?).
Dear Bishop Barron, you are a very wise man. Your words could bring catholics and protestants together, so they can see each other as brothers.
Perhaps Luther's phrase that I love the most is " Every good Christian must read and write".
Catholicism and being a born again Christian with the same theology that Luther has, indeed the one that emanates from the pages of scriptures, are like oil and water. So he can say nice things about Luther, but it's all a superficial show and will not unite anyone when push comes to shove. It's a lie.
With regard to a great many comments and responses seen here below ...know this: "For those who have the Holy Faith nothing needs to be said.... but for those who have not the Faith...nothing can be said''... how true how true.
WOW! Extolling the virtue of THE protesting heretic. Amazing! And you are a Bishop of the Roman Catholic Church? Even more amazing.
Yeah, I can't see a charitable interpretation of what Bishop Barron said here. It's so off base.
@@georgepenton808 I don't see it that way. Luther said his theology stands or falls on 'faith alone.' Bishop Barron just dismissed that as the exaggerating effects of puppy love. It was a charitable take, to be sure, but arguably all the more effective a denunciation because of that.
Get over it.
He's trying to lure unsuspecting Christians to Catholicism, Mormon style
Martin Luther’s criticism of indulgences in the Catholic Church AND the serf like grip of German elites on 90% of the people might have unleashed a yearning for individual freedom. I hope Bishop Barron will give another lecture on Martin Luther and the effects his writings had on the people of that time. I enjoyed this lecture very much, Martin Luther is a fascinating figure. I read that Martin Luther King Sr. changed his name because he admired Martin Luther. And ML’s writings seems to have created many other Christian religions. ❤✝️
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves." Matthew 7:15
I can’t believe what I’m hearing!
THIS LIFE
therefore is not righteousness, but growth in righteousness, not health, but healing, not being but becoming, not rest but exercise. We are not yet what we shall be, but we are growing toward it, the process is not yet finished, but it is going on, this is not the end, but it is the road. All does not yet gleam in glory, but all is being purified.
-Martin Luther
The acceptance of Luther by German rulers had nothing to do with religion, it was all about power
That is quite an historical inference. I don’t think you can be so sure of that.
same why pagan kings converted to christianity. It all was just about power.
@@misterrex684 A bit like Trump and evangelical America?
*The acceptance of Martin Luther BY THE PEOPLE had EVERYTHING to do with justification by faith through scripture above all else.*
Love all people
“I just know Jesus and the Church are one.”
St Joan of Arc
This is the first time I've heard this critique of Luther; a critique of romantic extremes, of poetry. If I were a Catholic, I would pun it "the poetic effects of sin'.
If you're into writing then you've got yourself a great poem title!
Four years since your comment,I suppose I could steal it from you? ;P
I applaud you Bishop Barron for you objectivity and the fact that you are open minded about Luther, this is indeed a step forward in the ecuminical conversation. I mean it seem to me that the Catholic view in the USA is way more open minded than other part of the world, probably because Protestantism is still in majority in USA. I always say when I talk about Luther is the fact that he wanted to reform the Catholic Church and he was right if you see what the Catholic Church did in the 16th Century with the indulgence, fortunately it was abolished by Pope Pius V in 1567.
Still being done today. I go to Catholic church and there's still offerings to release the souls of purgatory. Purgatory to me was a place before Jesus was even born. Because no one couldnt go anywhere after death.
+Bishop Robert Barron - could you please elaborate more on those points where, as you said, "I disagree with lots and lots of his ideas."? You seemed to be solely laudatory of Luther, without specifying with which of his ideas you - or Catholics, in general - should disagree.
Thank you.
Solely laudatory?! I argued in the video that his central teaching is substantially incorrect! I might invite you to take another look at the piece.
I'm sorry, but I didn't hear any response to my point that your video might lead some people to believe that they can be good Lutherans - remaining outside of the Catholic Church - and still be saved... almost as if there's really no good reason for Catholics to evangelize to protestants.
BTW, what is your reaction to this response to your Luther video: www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-martin-luther-bishop-barron
He likes Luther's love and linguistic flare, but disagrees with Sola Scriptura.
Cecilia Ortiz
Better than praying the rosary is reading the New Testament and understanding what it says. The rosary, where did it come from? I bet Paul, Peter, and the rest of the apostles never knew about this ritual.
Cecilia Ortiz
The rosary is just a repetition of made up prayers created by someone and it is something like a talisman, There is NO reason to jump to the conclusion that because Jesus gave the apostle John to Mary, Jesus gave the whole of humanity to her, this is an exaggeration and a misrepresentation of the text. This is typical Catholic Biblical wrong way of interpreting scriptures, and just an example of how scripture is twisted to support a made up believe. If you want to learn christianity stop reading catholic books that distort what you are reading, use your own understanding, not someone else’s you will do better.
I'm a Lutheran who sees much to appreciate in the Council of Trent. I wish it had been a truely ecumenical council in its time. This is a healthy perspective which I share and is necessary to bring Lutherans - and Luther himself - back into the catholic church. I pray that the dialogue continues.
Excuse me Your Excellency, how can you defend Luther and claim to follow the teachings of Our Lord??
...not only represent a step forward but lead to the union of the one true Church
Why didn't Luther strive to become a Saint.
A saint gives up his power to God.
The RCC doesn't decide who is a saint and who makes the pearly gates
According to 2000 + yrs of Dogma and Doctorine that has been spun and what scripture that you want to cherry pick.Good Luck and cover your mouth and wash your hands
@@bigwoody4704 Luther was cherry-picking and throwing out 7 books of the Bible.
The Princes in the Ivory Vatican towers have been taking creative license with history for 1700 yrs
@@bigwoody4704 Yeah, yeah, yeah. You are a typical revolutionary who hates Church founded by Jesus and prefers the one founded by Luther who was visited by a devil every night (he wrote about that himself). He also was throwing feces at the devil. He also wrote about this.
Beautifully discussed subject! Thank you Bishop Barron!
I suggest bishop Barron should read more about Luther, specially his last years, after the reformation. Only hten he would understand the serious mistakes of Luther's thought and of protestantism in general.
Friend, I clearly stated in the video that I disagree massively with Luther. What mistakes of his do you think I'm not noticing?
Thank you for your answer, Fr. Robert. Although you indeed say in a part of the video that you disagree massively with Luther, you also express of him as a "pius and brilliant" religious man, who felt deeply inloved with God. This way of expressing about Luther conveys the idea, whether you intended to or not, that his teachings were right except some minor mistakes. Besides the three "solas" you mention, which are great mistakes (and it is not clear enough the severity of these errors in the video) it is worth mentioning for example what Luther thought about human reason («The reason is the devil's great whore, a fucking meal for scabies and leprosy»), or what he thought about human freedom (that is incompatible with God whom knows and determines everything), or about human nature (radically and irremediably corrupted), or about grace (which is like white snow over human muck, so that any effort towards good doing, is not only useless but it's even a diabolic temptation, where by his famous phrase: sin hard, and believe harder), and so on.
It is shockingly instructive to read what Luter himself wrote on this matters, excerpts of which one can find collected by good catholic apologists. Also about his life in his last years, and the way he used to express about his enemies, about the Pope, and about the Universities of Paris and Lovain, about religious life, about celibacy, about good manners, and so on.
I think that the last thing Satan wants is that we come to know the truth about the so-called Reformation, because when a protestant discovers the truth, he becomes catholic at once. The sad thing is that we catholics, aren't helping enough to turn this truth more accessible.
Also a common mistake is to think that catholic thought about grace (or faith or scripture) was obscured in the time of Luther.
Bishop Barron specifically addressed the errors of the solas, as well as saying the he massively disagreed with Luther's theology. Yes Luther did love Jesus, however imperfectly and misguided he may have been, and yes he was brilliant, however he misused his brilliance.
Feri del Carpio-Marek Oh friend, you're just twisting my words out of all recognition.
Dear Fr Robert, I'm sorry if I twisted your words, I didn't intend to do so. I hope my comment might be useful to others that fall in the same misunderstanding.
I would also suggest looking at Luther’s 95 Theses (primary source) and Roland Bainton’s book, Here I Stand (biography).
"Luther turned priests into laymen by turning laymen into priests" says Marx. This seems to be the objective meaning of Protestanism regardless of intentions.
go read 1 Timothy
I did. Marx makes a sociological and historical argument.
Fuckboi and Lavacunt
Go change your user name before pretending you care what's in the Bible.
Yahh and see what Marxs did on its application
And damn you - worx out pretty good
More "flowery words"....running circles, dancing around the Truth.....!!
Scott _____ Seriously? You are claiming to know more about Catholicism than Bishop Barron? I recommend you to read some of HIS books before you pass such flaccid and shallow judgments
I am at a crossroads (no pun intended😉). I was raised, rather loosely, Catholic. Not strict or “cradle Catholic” by any means. I am now trying to find my way back, retracing my steps and a very stale trail of breadcrumbs. In so doing, Bishop Barron has been instrumental and I am grateful to him and the Word on Fire ministry. I am struggling though, with some issues I have with the Catholic Faith. Number one being the requirement of priestly celibacy. As far as I have been able to determine, this is certainly not Biblical. I am certain that this requirement has worked to draw in the pedophiles and homosexuals that have, for lack of a better word, “infiltrated” the Church and used the Priesthood for cover.
I am drawn to Lutheran and Episcopalian Faiths as what I believe to be the “next, best, thing”. I always loved the authenticity of the Catholic Church being started by Christ as he directed St. Peter to build the Church. I also love the Sacraments and the overall Doctrine of Catholicism and the basic approach to Faith that Catholicism teaches us. I just cannot accept how they have hidden pedophiles and openly accept homosexual/predator bishops and priests. That seems to be their “legacy” today and it is a major stumbling block for me.
I say, to whomever might be listening, allow priests and nuns to marry if they want to. Eradicate the perversion rife in the ranks of the Church. I see this requirement as, somewhat, sadistic in nature and has lead the Church to scandal.
Catholicism is not part of Christianity. There's a reason why these individuals broke away from the Vatican. The problems with Catholcism are far too many to list, but among them are: praying to Mary (who often sits upon an altar within their church, sometimes with candles lit) which is 100% idolatry, veneration of the saints and praying to angel, purgatory (which was, and is, literally a scam to con money out of ppl back in the day to build Cathedrals). Catholics have a totally different doctrine than what's in the Bible too... they don't preach the gospel. In fact, Christ is so busy or mean or whatever that you have to pray to His mom.
Rome was, and has always been, a front for Satan to persecute the true Church. If they weren't feeding Christians to the lions, figures like Bloody Mary were persecuting members of Christ's true church who only wanted to preach scripture in their own native languages (which was only in Latin, only readable by the elites of the day).
Btw, the Catholic church wasn't created by Peter. Anyways, Steven Lawson teaches about these Reformers, and it's fascinating. It gives a glimpse into why these men fell away from Catholicism and what they were about.
The scripture is set in stone, but the fabrications of man are not. In the same way that Jews strayed from the light of God, I fear too that the Catholics have. Although Luthers actions have lead to some fairly ridiculous denominations and beliefs, those who are true in faith and follow the light of God, know the hiss of the snakes.
It's terrible that Baron doesn't talk like a Catholic, not to talk of a bishop.
I was brought up in Catholicism and came to the same conclusion that Luther came to from reading and studying the scriptures. I didn't even know who Luther really was either, so if people want to say I was brainwashed by Luther they would be wrong. I am convinced by the Word of God and not by any human being.
Catholics always say all real Christians are brainwashed by Luther even though Luther was not a part of the conversion - just God and his Word! Praise the Lord! I also found the same beliefs through scripture! I think Luther just became a born again Christian is all.
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr The issue is they listen too much to their so called leaders especially that Muppet dressed up in the gay Mardi gras outfit.
What authority did martin luther have to change scripture?
@@freedomfields5569 He didn’t
The Bible can be interpreted in any way a person chooses to. There is only one truth and one Church that interprets the Word in light of that truth
Bishop Barron “Luther, I have been fascinated by him for a long time?” Makes the wise Catholic wonder!
Multiple truths are a fact of life. And also, the hierarchy of truths... Love is at the top: "The end of my labors has come. All that I have written appears to be as so much straw after the things that have been revealed to me." When later asked ... to return to writing, Aquinas said, "I can write no more. I have seen things that make my writings like straw."
i am confused , whether you are a Protestant Bishop or a Catholic.
I think you meant you are a dumbass
Works are evidence of salvation, not the progenitor of salvation - lest any man should boast.
Good God, your mind is just so much pumped up ... I'm watching your channel for a few days and can't believe.
Just relax, exhalate and enjoy the beatiful life around you!
Wish you the best preacher!
Hello,
Have you read the 95 thesis of Martin Luther?
Thank you.
@soriano147 I read them. I expected a lot from the 95 Theses. I expected Fr. Luther to lament so many things about the Catholic church. I expected iconography and Idolatry to be forefront. The 95 theses were more like 95 stanzas of a poem. I was taught in public school that paying for indulgences and the weaponization of confession were the reasons that Protestant religions were on the right side of history.
When I read the 95 theses I found a lot of overlap with the Catholic Church. I found a lot of reaching as to why Catholicism was "wrong." As someone who never wanted to be Catholic, when I finally read Luther's actual words, and learned about his personal life, I knew that Catholicism was for me. It is hard to explain over text/comments. Luther was probably a good man, but he also claimed in his journal/testimony that he would fart at demons that he visualized. I'm not sure he is the leader you think he is. He was not the first leader of apostasy and will certainly not be the last.
My concern is that Luther led a lot of people away from the Mother Church by claiming to be logical. Luther led a revolution that led his newfound church to continue to canonize Saints (which is not protestant), and, therefore against his teaching. He led a church that mostly follows the Catholic tradition. He eliminated 7 books of the bible by his own decree (despite the doctrine of Sola Scriptura). He downplayed and therefore destroyed sacraments of the church. He created an entire schism while claiming to be faithful to God. Worst of all, the Jews love Luther. If you believe in the New Testament as the new Covenant of the Lord Jesus you should be fearful that the old ways may corrupt the new. Sacrifice in the New Testament is of bread an water to Jesus. The old ways... well.... they require a lot worse sacraments.
Thank God for Luther and The Reformation.
God doesnt creat nor lead men to evil, so dont thank him for that its heretical.
@@firekoovin3347 The Pope disagrees with you.
"I think that the intentions of Martin Luther were not mistaken. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not correct. But in that time, if we read the story of the pastor, a German Lutheran who then converted when he saw reality-he became Catholic-in that time, the Church was not exactly a model to imitate. There was corruption in the Church, there was worldliness, attachment to money, to power . . . and this he protested. . . . And today Lutherans and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err. He made a medicine for the Church." --Pope Francis
@@Mygoalwogel demonic shit bro he actually said that???wtf is with V2 now a days? I dont want to be like a protestent that makes up their own religion, oh my God do we have so many wolves in the one true holy church. anyhow many catholic saints, popes of the past, and peter would condem protestents, There's only one true church you could ever go to.
On the Jews & Their Lies is one of the most controversial works by Protestant reformer, Martin Luther. In one of the most notorious chapters in the book, Luther urges the German people to “raze and destroy [the Jews’] houses,"
On this topic you are going against the church or against your self.
Luther got a raw deal - he lived in an age of a totally corrupt church - Luther was a member of the Observant Augustine order - an order that saw problems in the church back then - an orthodox Lutheran can be just as holy as a Catholic - I'm Catholic with no intent of going Lutheran but Martin Luder (his birth name) got a lot right.
Thank you as a recovering lutheran I agree
Yes. I'm looking at some of these priests who are standing up for right in our time. They have the benefit of Canon lawyers.
I am Roman Catholic and I agree- for me the most profound writings in Christianity come from Augustine Paul and Martin Luther what is most powerful about Luther he does not go into --his moral anthropology his understanding of Sin which we Catholics can learn from Man is a piece of sh... covered with snow ---harsh but it allows costly grace!!
it still has a false gospel
As someone who has only come to faith 3 years ago. I have been part of a new-charismatic movement, however, I have struggled with the certain aspects of Protestantism, namely sola fide! My conversion came through my first ever attempt at Lent in which I abstained from pornography and masturbation. Abstinence was the “works” and I called out to Jesus which was in faith.
Not to think I can score points with God through my works, but certainly one can be drawn into deeper relationship with Him. Therefore, I think faith and works cannot be divided, as it says in James 2:18. Furthermore, I need the structure of Lent, a designated season to which we can all deny ourselves and draw closer to Him. I will be attending mass this Ash Wednesday 👌
I went to the Traditional Latin Mass this Ash Wednesday, it so happened to fall on my birthday this year. It was the most beautiful thing I’ve experienced. I started with the Charismatic group in my town. Until a man tried to hit on me. I’m married. He took me to a back room to pray for me but he cornered me. Grabbing my hand. I ran to the nearest door and never went back. I didn’t leave the church. I left the group. Now I’m looking into becoming a Parish member in the Traditional Latin Church. I love history. I think since I started to look into the church’s history. I’ve been more interested in the Traditional Latin Mass since. Never looked back. It’s awesome 😎
As a Christian you should put away porn for good. How can you call yourself a follower without following? Only children of God will be saved. Do you live for the flesh which ends in death or life for the spirit which leads to everlasting life?
A very interesting video. I find the solos very interesting. After speaking about grace to various Christians I find that Catholics, Protestants and the orthodox have a very different definition of grace as an example. I may have to read those books you mentioned!
Bao Duong be careful , google Catholics worshiping Mary before you look too deeply at them, they nearly all say they don’t, click on link for verse regarding grace through Faith www.google.com.au/search?q=kjv+grace+through+faith&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari
The Catholic and Orthodox view on grace are the same.
The protestants ignore the book of James.
@@garyjaensch7143 Catholics don't worship Mary. Protestants on the other hand...love picking and choosing what books go into the Bible.
@@claudius_drusus_ I.E heresy...
@@claudius_drusus_ James is canonical scripture in every Protestant church on earth, including Lutheran. You are too much tuned in to amateur Catholic apologists, who make a good living as "apologists." These amateurs are old pros at reviving the old divisions, as if 500 years of perspective and distance hasn't brought more light than heat. Father Barron brings perspective, and balance. Here he fails to mention that Luther described the faith he wrote about as "a living thing, full of every good work." Luther derided prescribed good works as brownie points to gain favor with God. He saw outrageous abuses in the practice, and he objected to a preacher raising money for the construction of St.Peter's by selling indulgences to get your deceased relatives released from purgatory. His pitch was this: "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, a soul from purgatory springs." The works that Luther lauded were those that sprung from the gift of faith that God gives, works that spring from the heart. This kind of faith " works by love," which comes from a verse in Paul's epistle to the Galatians, an epistle which Luther cherished and compared to his beloved wife Kathryn, a former nun who brought domestic tranquility and good order, and the blessing of offspring, into his otherwise turbulent life.
A very well argued analysis. Such a refreshing difference from my early Catholic education that made no attempt to see the reasons for the Reformation and just condemned it as stupid and selfish.
As an ex Roman Catholic I'm in agreement with Luther that Scripture teaches that justification is through faith alone but that true faith always produces good works. I'm also in agreement with him over the Papacy being the Antichrist, that praying to Mary and the saints is idolatry, that the mass isn't a sacrifice, that the Roman Catholic church isn't the one true Church, and that Scripture is the sole final authority in matters of teaching and doctrine.
Why would God allow this heresy to be the base of the church for 1500? Use your brain because you’re fooling yourself. The arrogance to think you’ve outsmarted everyone. This is pride.
This was good. Also, I like the context that Bishop Barron gives this in his video that I recently cam across "Bishop Barron on Martin Luther". I think it is both simple and revealing.
“The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.”
Here's some telling quotes by Martin Luther as well: “If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.”
“Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.”
“If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham”
“To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” - “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs”
“It is more important to guard against good works than against sin.”
“Good works are bad and are sin like the rest.”
@@joshcruise2657 Compared to the 7 disastrous Popes that ruled for years on end, without the RCC removing them completely , and still calling itself the one true church , there has been grave miscarriages of justice in both the protestant and the RCC . Just one very good reason not to follow a man/ organization for any reason and only follow what the new testament says about how we are to conduct ourselves and what we should believe.
@@georgepenton808 It would be foolish to ignore the good and just focus on the bad, however when the roman catholic church decided that it was the one true church so long ago, it has not been living up to it's reputation that it set forth, for itself. There were and are today born again Christians martyred for their faith in Jesus and some called themselves catholics and some called themselves believers . Again we are to follow Jesus, not a church, not an organization, and not any man , martyr or otherwise. What can I learn from a martyr ? That I have a long way to go to get to their level of belief.
@@brucewmclaughlin9072 Christ established a Church. Christians say they believe in the catholic (universal) Church in the Creed, which was and remains the definition of what it means to be a Christian. We can argue all day, as Catholics and Protestants tend to do, about what each line of the Creed means (here, for instance, which Church), but what you are arguing now seems clearly outside the Creed and thus arguably is not Christian.
@@paulmiller3469 What I am saying is not to follow a man , or an organization but Christ alone . The scriptures are there for a reason not to be added to by an organization that has proved itself to be corruptible ,just like the reformation that brought forth so many corrupted beliefs.
The Church as defined by Eph 2:18-22 in contrast to the controversial Matthew verse about Peter and the Rock. 2 Tim.3 :16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Written before the new testament and still valid.
Did I answer your concern?
As a Lutheran, I found this video very fascinating. While I strongly affirm Lutheran theology, I definitely enjoy, and share Bishop Barron's characteristics of Luther as a person (and he certainly had his flaws no doubt).
However, I find a lot of peculiar claims in the comment section. I'm by far no expert in Catholic ecclesiology, but viewing ex ecclesiam nulla salus in light of the articles of Lumen Gentium (especially on the Holy Spirit), I find quite a few of them rather odd (even hillarious, had this not been such serious issue).
As a side note, speaking of the Reformation, I personally believe it was a huge strategical mistake by the Catholic Church not to give Cajetan mandate to engage Luther theologically (in contrast to on church authority alone) in their debate. What could have been the debate of the century turned into a textbook example of talking past each other.
Snike - let the dead bury their dead
I believe Rome vastly underestimated the impact Luther was going to have on the continent (mainly through the printing press).
It seems a debate of that kind would have made the Church look weak stooping to the level of a lowly monk who dare challenges
Catholic hierarchy.
I don't think Rome was prepared or inclined to debate its monopoly of power over Christendom in Europe. Afterall, it held dominion
for 1000 years.
As a child, I was shaped by my Polish grandmother's view that Catholicism was the one and only true religious path. Hers was a very beautiful, devout, and decidedly pre-Vatican II version of the RCC. Upon attending Catholic school in the late 80s, I was blindsided by the modern ecumenical "Catholic-lite" church: yes, Catholicism is nice and lovely, but all faiths are equally valid and any good person can go to heaven regardless of belief.
Even in my young mind, logic caused me to take the next leap: if long held beliefs and traditions were no longer mandatory and could be questioned, why not question the Bible and Christianity itself? Logically, Luther had just one more leap to go before casting out the whole of Christianity, and it's surprising he did not make it.
Needless to say, in my adult years, I have become a secular humanist. Why do I write this then? Just as a warning to Catholics who would like to see their Church continue in the future that, if they keep discarding what makes their teachings unique in favor of ecumenicalism, young people will see little/no need to continue in the faith. Personally, even though I no longer believe, I would not like to see the Catholic Church fade into the sands of time if, for nothing else, it is one of the few sources of beauty and charity left in the Western world. But promoting the narrative that other forms of Christianity are equally valid will only succeed in pushing young people out the door. The Boomers, with their "you do your thing" philosophy, are not the future. If you wish to continue, find a way to make this special for young people, not just another option. Peace.
Cassandra'sCurse Did you think I was promoting the view that all faiths are equally valid?! I might ask you to watch the video again.
Thank you very much for responding to my post, Bishop Barron. I sincerely appreciate it and have enjoyed much of your work. I apologize in advance for the length of this post.
Please know that any criticism comes from a place of concern. I have rewatched your video and appreciate that both you and Pope Francis are trying to bridge the divide between Protestants and Catholics in the name of peace and Christian brotherhood. The problem is, IMHO, that many doctrinal issues the Catholic Church holds dear are non-negotiable. Such as, transubstantiation is justified by John 6:53. If that is true, then the Catholics and Orthodox Christians are the only ones with the true form of Communion and need to preach to their Protestant brothers to rejoin the true Church. Is the Pope truly the Rock and Vicar of Christ on Earth? If he is, then by disobeying his authority, Protestants are in conflict with the very thing they hold most dear (the Bible). Should a priest be in the mold of Christ (male, preferably single) or can a priest be anyone literate enough to read the Bible? Is Mary truly forever Virgin and full of Grace, or is she simply the tool used by God to bring Christ into the world, no less a sinner than anyone else? These issues matter greatly, and the answers depend on whether one sees the Catholic Church as THE Church or whether he views it simply as another denomination as Protestantism holds. No matter how you cut it, the answer can't be both.
In addition, I can't get on board with whitewashing Luther himself. Having read much about the man, he seems to have begun as a sincere, though horrifically troubled and neurotic, monk who wanted to correct abuses in the Church. However, once the German nobles flocked to him (for the same reason Henry VIII's nobles embraced his Reformed Church: the seizure of land and wealth from the Church made them immensely wealthy), he became convinced that he alone had the one true Gospel and was restoring true Christianity. As such, he fully believed that the Jews would convert en masse once they heard his Truth. Once they did not, he showed his true colors and advocated punishments against Jews which were only distinguishable from Hitler's Final Solution in the sense that Luther would have allowed Jewish converts to live (though one imagines under severe scrutiny for the rest of their lives). As someone who has Jewish ancestry in my relatively recent lineage, I can't just excuse this as being a product of his time. No, Luther's anti-Semitism laid the groundwork for the Third Reich. Not to mention the fact (which many Protestants overlook) that Luther was as much, if not more, critical of fellow "reformers" as the Catholic Church. Clearly, the man loved power and did not want a challenge to his reign as the Pope of Protestantism.
Viewing this from a historical prospective, I think it's fine time to acknowledge that the Protestant Reformation may have been the single worst event in Western history. By dividing Christendom and irrevocably weakening the Church, it set the stage for many of the ills which seek to overwhelm the West today: militant Islam, fundamentalist cults, rise in Nationalism (which fueled two world wars), Communism and extreme Capitalism (both of which reduce human value to one's labor), destruction of the family, etc. What so many secular professors seek to avoid acknowledging is the fact that Western civilization was created almost entirely by the Catholic Church and without Her influence, may cease to exist. I feel this is a real threat considering that the path the RCC has been on for the past few decades seems quite similar to that of the Anglican/Episcopalian church: trying so hard to accommodate modernity and discard traditions which may strike the outsider as outdated. As the stats have shown, this more inclusive attitude has done little more than to empty the pews. Personally, I think the world would be a much darker place without the Catholic Church and want to see Her continue well into the future.
Thank you for reading and sorry about the length. Peace.
With all due respect, Your Grace, I did not mean to imply that you stated that all faiths are equally valid (sorry if I did not make that clear in the responses). What I meant was that, in a quest to create greater Christian unity (a noble goal), it seems that more traditional forms of Christianity (Catholicism and Orthodoxy) have been willing to downplay or even discard doctrines/facets of their faiths instead of challenging Protestants and radical sects to read and accept the Biblical justifications for the doctrines. For example: transubstantiation, the Immaculate Conception, the papacy, etc. Either these doctrines are true and worth defending (and possibly dying for) or they are simply nice little cultural remnants and can be discarded at will. If the former, Catholics, in the name of tolerance, do a grave disservice by not guiding their Protestant brethren to the true Church. If the latter, then why even form churches at all? One can simply read the Bible at home. Perhaps you can see the danger in the logical conclusion of such thought. Peace.
I completely reaffirmed Catholic doctrine in the video! I said that Trent was right to criticize Luther's central position.
Cassandra'sCurse
Well written. I think deep down inside you are still much more RCC than you realize, which is not a bad thing. I'm pretty sure that the good and beautiful parts of your education and upbringing are deeply rooted in your soul even decades upon decades later and continue to implicitly and explicitly influence how you walk out your life every day. So act with love in all things.....
Am I missing something? Do I perceive that you are saying Paul's inspirational writings about Grace Only are inadequate; even though Paul was selected by Jesus to preach "Grace" to the Gentiles, uncircumcised? Interestingly enough, Jesus gave the Apostles direction to minister only to Lost Sheep of Isreal, circumcised.
Had to listen to a Catholic priest talking about Luther.
Saral Israel Shrestha Yeah, we tend to forget that he's a bishop now.
I didn't learn much, other than that I'm still a Lutheran, and why I remain one. When you examine the horrible doctrine of the current pope, it becomes clear why the Solas are important. Do you put your trust in man or God?
@@sweynforkbeard8857 "the pillar and bulwark of the truth is the church of the living God", 1Tim3:15. Sola scriptura is not the pillar of thruth, so you may want to reconsider your essential doctrine which is unbiblical. Not saying you need to become Catholic, but sola scriptura and sola fide are not in the scripture at least not with the word "sola". Anywone who knows the bible is aware of this and you should too.
sweyn forkbeard- Have u ever researched the life of Martin Luther?? He’s a horrible horrible evil man..and he changed words and rejected 11 books from the Bible to fit his ideology.. So, who do u put your faith on, the Lord or Martin Luther ??
@@ameliadelcastillo5424 Luther was merely a person who can only be judged thought the lens of his time that he lived in. Judging historical figures by todays standards is foolish. The followings of the faithful in the Lutheran tradition do not depend in any way on the writings of Luther, other than he wrote a few hymns we like to sing on occasion. What he wrote about Jews, or the Turk is hardly a concern of anyone in the church, nor is it a part of Lutheran doctrinal practices.
The teachings we do adhere to is the need to be saved through faith (Sola fide and Sola gratia), and the need to read scripture for ourselves (Sola scriptura), and not depend too much on human sources, or popular societal dogma to be confused as a source of spirituality. You can see this issue in many churches (including the Lutheran ELCA), so I don't see what the Pope is doing as a lot different from what is happening in a lot of churches today. I just don't agree with it, nor do I view the Pope as any sort of spiritual leader.
Bishop Barron, would you ever consider evaluating the arguments of Martin Luther and more contemporary Protestants such as C.S. Lewis?
As a reformed Protestant Barron is by far my favorite catholic
I agree--Reformed also.
Back to Orthodoxy You are absolutely right
@@georgepenton808 Luther was probably more fun at a party.
He's trying to lure you in like a Mormon
When ever I Read Luther's documents I can Feel God's presence I can tell Luther Was used by God to Bring Back the one true Church Jesus Christ founded Reading the Gospels along side Luthers writting's is why i am know a Lutheran God lead me to the Lutheran church and I been to many different churches and i can say God's presence i have found to being the strongest within theLlutheran church.
Luther was a tool of Satan
Apparently Martin Luther received a vision which contradicts the book of James... faith without action is dead..
Seems legit?
Enjoy hell
Bishop Barron I love how you approach things so calmly, so cool, so scholarly.
You are the medicine to the reactionaries in the Church - a voice of temperance in a wilderness of insecure ultra Conservatives.
Simultaneously not falling into the pitfalls and indifferece of the far left.
Catholics should be neither everything goes far left or reactionary far right - we should be temperate centrists like Bishop Barron - people who can see both the good and the bad in all things.
To canonize Luther and view him as a saint is wrong.
To demonize Luther and view him as a devil is wrong.
To view Luther as a flawed and sinful man who had both good and bad qualities and led to things both good and bad - that is the wise and charitable Catholic Christian Way. That is the Way of holy and wise Bishops like Pope Francis, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, and Bishop Barron.
If it wasn't Luther it would have been someone else.
Jeez, you can hardly put half a dozen people in a room for 10 minutes before they disagree.
So 1500 years of holding it together(excluding orthodox) was bloody miraculous!
Bishop Barron, as a practicing Lutheran I want to say thank you. Once for a personally unbiased, scholarly- based analysis of Luther, but more importantly as a Christian who is trying to sort through the noise and learn how to live as Christ intends us to. Before there was Catholic, before there was protestant, before the was anything else there was simply "Christian". That is my quest. Unfortunately it seems that for every question I finally find an answer to, two or three new questions arise so the more I learn the dumber I get.
The good thing about Luther is he challenged and he started the hard conversations and he made people think. He spoke out of conviction and sincerity and a true effort to correct what he considered a wrong, and it helps immensely to compare his actions not only to other church doctors but in an historical context as well. He wasn't anti-Catholic right out of the gate. At the same time from what I have learned about him is he could be quite the yutz and was far from a perfect man or a perfect Christian so I don't swallow blindly all his teachings.
Catholic means Universal. That’s why Paul went everywhere he could to spread the gospel. And sent letters to all communities and so did every other apostle. The twelve apostles we all killed for preaching the gospel and spreading the good news.
@@LandaverdeJR Catholic means universal, but the context of how this word is used and intended in conjunction with the Roman creed makes that interpretation problematic. Church history under emperor Constantine is a bloody one, connected to oppression, murder, blackmail and coersion.
It is safe to say that, in the common and modern tongue, "catholic" can no longer be used apart from its historical context: to refer to the church after the council of Nicea.
@@a-sheepof-christ9027 church history in our times is problematic too. Just look at the news 📰 or out recent history world war II. Would you say the word “Christian” is not linked to world war II. Nuclear weapons are linked to Christian nations like USA and Rusia. That’s problematic too.
We have more than 100,000 Christian churches all preaching different doctrines. Non-Christians are so confused 🤔 by it. The truth has been diluted to the point where no one can claim they have the whole truth. Except the catholic church and Orthodox. 1 Timothy 3,15 say that church is “the pillar and foundation of the truth.” But which one?
@@LandaverdeJR The truth is to be believe in Jesus Christ whatever you are a:
-Catholic
-Orthodox
-Armenian Apostolic Church
-Coptic
-Baptist
-Calvinist
-Methodist
-Pentecostal
so should i read luthers mystical writings vs teresa avila & john of the cross?
Can you say "yes to both Luther and Trent"? "Both/and" sounds progressive but is not possible when the two positions are mutually exclusive. I guess the deeper question is whether or not Luther and Roman Catholicism are compatible on the key issues of monergism vs. synergism in salvation, works and grace, and even more basically, Biblical interpretation.
As an aside, Ryrie's book is titled "The Radicals that made the Modern World", not "The Faith......"
Well, I explicitly argued that they are not compatible. I opined that Luther's solas might be read as over the top expressions of an experience of grace.
Thanks. I'm not saying that there is not compatibility although I suspect that at bottom there are impasses that cannot be breached (certainly many millions of words have been spilled on this topic).
I do support efforts such as "Evangelicals and Catholics Together". I assume you must have commented or written about ECT and would be interested in what you have to say about that effort. How much is common ground (just using different vocabulary or coming from different angles) and how much is complete incompatibility?
I explicitly denied that one can say yes to both Luther and Trent at the doctrinal level. I said clearly that Trent was right in its critique of Luther's teaching. I was merely suggesting that we might take Luther's language in a different register.
Interesting, as a Scandinavian, brought up Protestant, yet an artist; I may see things off things missed. Here is my version. Luther was part of a period where only elites read books. The masses was in educated, and specific in Latin. So, as the priest then held sermons in Latin, only elites could follow. The masses were transfixed on all the beautiful rendering paintings , mureals and sculptures for their faith. Of course roundly exploited by overlords, sometimes priest, abuse off real estates as donations, willing or not. So a counter revolution was brewing. And, a nun shared Luther's didafaction. One, it would be" healthier if ministers off faith, ( some) married for obvious reasons. Aside, my biggest take away was his insight, sermons should be held in the local speech, so all could receive the word off God! And, he began to print the Bible in German. Now, phesants was slowly becoming educated, to reading, analizing, being in charge off their lives. This to me, was the biggest most amazing revolution for mankind in the west, later elsewhere. People owned their lives and could so to speak relate one on one with the word off God. But, as an Artist, we are aside so very blessed with all the incredible interpetations off the Gospel to this day. We, I though Protestant, studied Education in a College ( my choice), Saint Elizabeth College , Convent, NJ., Under the Sisters of Charity, with whom I connected and have very fond memories. Why, I wanted to know how the opposite Isle in the Gospel looked at life! We, are all today, going through re-evaluations, and how is it Jesus says don't look for the splinter in your brothers eye, you may have a beam in your own. The Cradle off our faith has Manny facets, faces, but above it all stand the Trinity for us all. For some the one God and disciples. But, the Ten commandments are so very clear and non negotiable. As, love thy neighbor, as they self. May we reach that some day. God Bless Bishop.🇩🇰🇺🇸🦅💜. Algorithms ...un educated...thy...
Luther is always a fun read, even when you end up disagreeing. He has the gift of gab. His pen was mightier than any sword
Apparently Martin Luther received a vision which contradicts the book of James... faith without action is dead..
Seems legit?
@@koppite9600 James 2 doesn't contridct sola fide
@@mrbeastvlogs9635 how?
Luther hated Jews and advocated for their destruction. He also altered the words of Holy Scripture to suit his new theology which was inspired by his extreme scrupulousness.
Wow this was incredibly enlightening and consistent
I always kind of felt the Solas were a bit hyperbolic, I mean, I'm pretty sure none of them actually lined-up with scripture, ironically.
I would like to see Father Barron in a conversation with John Macarthur! it would be great to see that kind of debate.
Im hoping for a dialogue instead
@@louieelric1773 probably Father Barron would try a Dialogue but I doubt that John Macarthur would like the same.
Yes, Luther was in love with Christ, but was also a widely recognized Professor of Theology with a tremendous understanding of the scriptures. With this in mind, it could be argued that he had a better balance on reality than what is proposed in this video. The council of Trent is a debatable source here as they were obviously out to counter Luther’s theology and their reaction as such was predictable. Further to this, does one really want teaching from one who is not in love with God? Anyway, a good video Bishop Barron! Enjoyed it. Thank you.
Committed Lutheran here - grateful to the bishop for being fair minded and true to his confession (though I agree with Kris Luther was better balanced and it's reasonable to ascribe slogans he approved of with teenage romanticism). For me, Trent was devastated by Martin Chemnitz's critique and has never sufficiently responded. Chemnitz thoroughly goes through Scripture and church fathers to demonstrate their teachings aligning with those of the Book of Concord. Ambrose: "But he who is righteous has righteousness given to him because he was justified from the washing of baptism. Faith, therefore is that which frees through the blood of Christ, because he is blessed 'whose transgression is forgiven, who sin is covered'". Augustine: "By the law we fear God, by faith we hope in God"
I know bizarre. Catholics love Catholicism, rather than God so much
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr Sadly true for some, but hopefully not the vast majority. I guess Protestants also have to check if they love their scriptures more than God. Anything can become a God, even something pure and holy.
@@dougnewman3935 I enjoyed reading this. You seem very well versed in the book of Concord! A good analysis!
@@krisjustin3884 I agree somewhat about the scriptures, but at the same time, without the scriptures we'd know nothing about God and all have Hindu steaks in us and be way off. What do we look to? If the Catholic Church didn't have the scriptures to at some level keep them accountable, they'd be further off than Mormons by this point.
With Bishops like this, no wonder there is such confusion within the Church, and hence no young people attending mass. Young people want and deserve more. My own son has just started to attend the Traditional Latin Mass as he said there was no substance, instruction or meaning in the Novus ordo mass
I know from experience however, that Bishop Baron and his followers are not prepared to listen. Hence forth there has to be a parting of the ways.
Hello Bishop Barron. Do you have any thoughts or comments on Bernard Lonergan? Thought I would ask. Thank you kindly.
Say yes to Heresy? Go back to the foundations of the Catholic Church. Certain pillars need not change. Did you forget also that later in Dylan,s life he admits to a partnership with the
Devil...sums it up I think.
Unsubstantiated claims. the same can be said of your faith. Just change Catholic Church to your Church. rational people engage with arguments.
Luis Blanco: so that’s your idea of a rational argument? Alrighty then...
@@brianincremona7121 Yes? I don't think is just my idea. the whole point was that making baseless accusations can be done to anyone or anything and it does not make it true. The only thing that shows is that you want it to be true.
Luther was a biblical scholar. And he read the Fathers.
From the Fathers....
Ambrose (340?-396), “How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23).
Athanasius (300?-375),
“The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth. (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.) The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear anything in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written,” (Athanasius, Exhort. ad Monachas).
“Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (Athanasius, De Synodis, 6).
We ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures...Let us then speak nothing concerning the Holy Ghost but what is written; and if anything be not written, let us not busy ourselves about it. The Holy Ghost Himself spoke the Scriptures; He has also spoken concerning Himself as much as He pleased, or as much as we could receive. Be those things therefore spoken, which He has said; for whatsoever He has not said, we dare not say. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4.17ff)
What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words. (Gregory of Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Book 12. On the Trinity, To Eustathius.)
Let us not therefore carry about the notions of the many, but examine into the facts. For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do not trust to others, but refer this to figures and calculation; but in calculating upon facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others; and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things; which may we all obtain, through the grace and love towards men of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.” (John Chrysostom, Homily on 2 Corinthians, 13.4)
For the reasonings of any men whatsoever, even though they be [true Christians], and of high reputation, are not to be treated by us in the same way as the canonical Scriptures are treated. We are at liberty, without doing any violence to the respect which these men deserve, to condemn and reject anything in their writings, if perchance we shall find that they have entertained opinions differing from that which others or we ourselves have, by the divine help, discovered to be the truth. I deal thus with the writings of others, and I wish my intelligent readers to deal thus with mine. (St Augustine, Letters, 148.15)
We are saved by living faith alone
A better way of putting it. I love it.
Praise the Lord Jesus Christ 🙏 Mother Mary Pray For Us 🙏Abba Father Bless us and we Adore You 🙏
I agree with the good Bishop. Wasn't Luther's notes bound in the Rosicrucian bindings? He was a tormented man too, Luther.....
I've read that some time ago ... can't we all just get along ..
@@georgepenton808 yep that's right
Rosicrucianism didn't arise until after Luther's death. Nothing Luther wrote had anything to do with Rosicrucianism. Anything "Lutheran" about Rosicrucianism is only by radical reinterpretation, of which Luther would have been horrified.
iraje hall he wasn’t interpreting the Bible however he pleased. He was very much Augustinian in his approach through and through. He regularly appealed to the church fathers.
My point is to say that to say Rosicrucianism is Lutheran both misunderstands rosicrucianism and Lutheranism altogether. Rosicrucianism was a fringe group, who embraced pseudo-gnostic views about human nature, and taught their methods as a means to realize your own divine nature.
The Lutheran tradition teaches that all humans are entirely fallen, corrupt in their nature, and require God to intervene by saving grace in order to regenerate a person. Nothing we do can make it happen. Rosicrucianism is fundamentally works based and founded on principles altogether at odds with Christianity.
In any case, Luther had nothing whatsoever to do with Rosicrucianism. He died before it was invented.
Bishop Barron, I notice quite a few of your Reformation-related videos sorta center around Luther. Have you done any pieces on Calvin, or would you consider doing so?
are u referring to the luther guy that forsakes his priestly vows and causing the Lord's church to be split into so many denominations?
The one who sought God with his whole heart and became a born again Christian, paving the way for many more
Believers need to expand in thinking both with mind and heart. This requires personal choice, time, sacrifices. So as to grasp as much as possible of the full counsel (will) of God.
I see parallels between Martin Luther’s dramatic realization of grace alone (i.e. I cannot ever measure up on my own, and thank you Lord for granting me grace rather than pure justice!) and St. Therese of Lisieux’s Little Way (i.e. I cannot ever measure up on my own, and thank you Lord for extending me Divine Mercy rather than Divine Justice!)
All believers are saints...the Apostle Paul stated this. Read Ephesians.