Luther Examined and Reexamined - A Review of Catholic Criticism and a Plea for Revaluation

W. H. T. (William Herman Theodore) Dau

Informations

• Publié par: ondri
• Publié le: 08 décembre 2010
• Nombre de lectures: 24
• Langue: English

Extrait

Project Gutenberg's Luther Examined and
Reexamined, by W. H. T. Dau
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at
no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever.
You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the
terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net
Title: Luther Examined and Reexamined A Review
of Catholic Criticism and a Plea for Revaluation
Author: W. H. T. Dau
Release Date: July 18, 2005 [EBook #16322]
Language: English
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG
EBOOK LUTHER EXAMINED AND REEXAMINED
***
Produced by Kurt A. Bodling, Ganser Library,
Millersville University, Millersville, PA, USALuther Examined and Reexamined A Review of
Catholic Criticism and a Plea for Revaluation
By W.H.T. Dau,
Professor, Concordia Theological Seminary
St. Louis, Mo. Concordia Publishing House 1917
PREFACE. One may deplore the pathetic courage
which periodically heartens Catholic writers for the
task of writing against Luther, but one can
understand the necessity for such efforts, and,
accordingly, feel a real pity for those who make
them. Attacks on Luther are demanded for
Catholics by the law of self-preservation. A recent
Catholic writer correctly says: "There is no doubt
that the religious problem to-day is still the Luther
problem." "Almost every statement of those
religious doctrines which are opposed to Catholic
moral teaching find their authorization in the
theology of Martin Luther."
Rome has never acknowledged her errors nor
admitted her moral defeat. The lessons of past
history are wasted upon her. Rome is determined
to assert to the end that she was not, and cannot
be, vanquished. In the age of the Reformation, she
admits, she suffered some losses, but she claims
that she is fast retrieving these, while
Protestantism is decadent and decaying. No
opposition to her can hope to succeed.
This is done to bolster up Catholic courage. The
intelligent Catholic layman of the present day
makes his own observations, and draws his ownmakes his own observations, and draws his own
conclusions as to the status and the future
prospect of Protestantism. Therefore, he must be
invited to "acquaint himself with the lifestory of the
man, whose followers can never explain away the
anarchy of that immoral dogma: 'Be a sinner, and
sin boldly; but believe more boldly still!' He must be
shown the many hideous scenes of coarseness,
vulgarity, obscenity, and degrading immorality in
Martin Luther's life." When the Catholic rises from
the contemplation of these scenes, it is hoped that
his mind has become ironclad against Protestant
argument. These attacks upon Luther are a plea
pro domo, the effort of a strong man armed to
keep his palace and his goods in peace.
Occurring, as they do, in this year of the Four-
hundredth Anniversary of the Reformation, these
attacks, moreover, represent a Catholic counter-
demonstration to the Protestant celebration of the
Quadricentenary of Luther's Theses. They are the
customary cries of dissent and vigorous
expressions of disgust which at a public meeting
come from parties in the audience that are not
pleased with the speaker on the stage. If the
counter-demonstration includes in its program the
obliging application of eggs in an advanced state of
maturity to the speaker, and chooses to emphasize
its presence to the very nostrils of the audience,
that, too, is part of the prevailing custom. It is
aesthetically incorrect, to be sure, but it is in line
historically with former demonstrations. No
Protestant celebration would seem normal without
them. They help Protestants in their preparations
for the jubilee to appreciate the remarks of David inPsalm 2, 11: "Rejoice with trembling." And if
Shakespeare was correct in the statement: "Sweet
are the uses of adversity," they need not be
altogether deplored.
An attempt is made in these pages to review the
principal charges and arguments of Catholic critics
of Luther. The references to Luther's works are to
the St. Louis Edition; those to the Book of
Concord, to the People's Edition.
Authors must be modest, and as a rule they are. In
the domain of historical research there is rarely
anything that is final. This observation was forced
upon the present writer with unusual power as the
rich contents of his subjects opened up to him
during his study. He has sought to be
comprehensive, at least, as regards essential
facts, in every chapter; he does not claim that his
presentation is final. He hopes that it may stimulate
further research.
This book is frankly polemical. It had to be, or there
would have been no need of writing it. It seeks to
meet both the assertions and the spirit of Luther's
Catholic critics. A review ought to be a mirror, and
mirrors must reflect. But there is no malice in the
author's effort.
W. H. T. Dau.
Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo.
May 10, 1917.TABLE OF CONTENTS.
l. Luther Worship 2. Luther Hatred 3. Luther
Blemishes 4. Luther's Task 5. The Popes in
Luther's Time 6. Luther's Birth and Parentage
7. Luther's Great Mistake 8. Luther's Failure as
a Monk 9. Professor Luther, D. D. 10. Luther's
"Discovery" of the Bible 11. Rome and the
Bible 12. Luther's Visit at Rome 13. Pastor
Luther 14. The Case of Luther's Friend
Myconius 15. Luther's Faith without Works 16.
The Fatalist Luther 17. Luther a Teacher of
Lawlessness 18. Luther Repudiates the Ten
Commandments 19. Luther's Invisible Church
20. Luther on the God-given Supremacy of the
Pope 21. Luther the Translator of the Bible 22.
Luther a Preacher of Violence against the
Hierarchy 23. Luther, Anarchist and Despot All
in One 24. Luther the Destroyer of Liberty of
Conscience 25. "The Adam and Eve of the
New Gospel of Concubinage" 26. Luther an
Advocate of Polygamy 27. Luther Announces
His Death 28. Luther's View of His Slanderers
1. Luther Worship.
Catholic writers profess themselves shocked by the
unblushing veneration which Luther receives from
Protestants. Such epithets as "hero of the
Reformation," "angel with the everlasting Gospel
flying through the midst of heaven," "restorer of the
Christian faith," grate on Catholic nerves. Luther's
sayings are cited with approval by all sorts of men.Men feel that their cause is greatly strengthened
by having Luther on their side. Luther's name is a
name to conjure with. Hardly a great man has lived
in the last four hundred years but has gone on
record as an admirer of Luther. Rome, accordingly,
cries out that Luther is become the uncanonized
saint of Protestantism, yea, the deified expounder
of the evangelical faith.
Coming from a Church that venerates and adores
and prays to—you must not say "worships"—as
many saints as there are days in the calendar, this
stricture is refreshing. Saints not only of
questionable sanctity, but of doubtful existence
have been worshiped—beg pardon! venerated—
by Catholics. What does the common law say
about the prosecution coming into court with clean
hands? If there is such a thing among Protestants
as "religious veneration" of Luther, what shall we
call the veneration of Mary among Catholics? Pius
IX, on December 8, 1854, proclaimed the
"immaculate conception," that is, the sinlessness of
Mary from the very first moment of her existence,
thus removing her from the sphere of sin-begotten
humanity. In 1913, the press of the country was
preparing its readers for another move towards the
deification of Mary: her "assumption" was to be
declared. That is, it was to be declared a Catholic
dogma that the corpse of Mary did not see
corruption, and was at the moment of her death
removed to heaven. The Pasadena Star of August
15th in that year wrote: "It is now known that since
his recent illness Pope Pius, realizing that his
active pontificate is practically at an end, hasexpressed to some of the highest dignitaries of the
Catholic Church at Rome the desire to round out
his career by this last great act." The Western
Watchman of July 3d in that year had in its
inimitable style referred to the coming dogma,
thus: "What Catholic in the world to-day would say
that the immaculately conceived body of the
Blessed Virgin was allowed to rot in the grave? The
Catholic mind would rebel against the thought; and
death would be preferred to the blasphemous
outrage." The grounds for wanting the
"assumption" of Mary fixed in a dogma were these:
"Catholics believe in the bodily assumption of the
Blessed Virgin, because their faith instinctively
teaches them that such a thing is possible and
proper, and that settles it in favor of the belief. The
body of our Lord should not taste corruption,
neither should the body that gave Him His body.
The flesh that was bruised for our sins was the
flesh of Mary. The blood that was shed for our
salvation was drawn from Mary's veins. It would be
improper that the Virgin Mother should be allowed
to see corruption if her Son was exempt