Monday, 31 October 2016

Martin Luther advocated the raping of Nuns ~ how can any Catholic praise him, or this hideous, evil "Reformation"?

Jacques Maritain in "Three Reformers", documents Martin Luther's view of women and especially Nuns. The heresiarch was a vicious, sadistic proponent of rape. Like the other "reformers", Luther was a debauched and grossly immoral man. 

After a rape of nuns which took place on the night of Holy Saturday, 1523, Luther calls the citizen Koppe, who organized the exploit, a " blessed robber," and writes to him, " Like Christ, you have drawn these poor souls from the prison of human tyranny. You have done it at a time providentially indicated, at that moment of Easter when Christ destroyed the prison of His own." (Ibid., 40; Weim., IX, 394-395.)

From the Joint Statement signed this morning, October 31, 2016 in Lund, Sweden: 

"...we are profoundly thankful for the spiritual and theological gifts received through the Reformation...we recommit ourselves to move from conflict to communion, we do so as part of the one Body of Christ"


Anonymous said...

Thanks for sharing this information so that the truth about Martin Luther is available to those being misled.

Anonymous said...

Maybe he had some dementia while he discovered faith not happens to the mayorities of leaders in power. Their brain stops functining.

Vox Cantoris said...

Good grief Dave, what are you doing here?

Nobody reading you at Pathetic? Shilling for clicks, are you?

Why do you associate with a web page that puts Catholicism on the same level as protestantism, atheism, and wicca, as an example.

Marcellina said...

Mr. Armstrong,

Thank you for the best laugh I have had in ages. Your blog on "Patheticos" is a mere trifle. Accusing Toronto Catholic of lying and then that YOU WONT STAND FOR IT is typical of a protestanized conciliar katholic who thinks they actually have the power of God to decide whether Barona makes it to purgatory.

You sound more like a hardline Lutheran than a foppish Conciliar katholic. Serious sin is writing for Patheticos...What is it the pay per click that makes you being an apologist for a filthy debauched heretical former priest in Luther? As far as ecumenism, the correct definition of ecumenism to is to bring the CATHOLIC TRUTH to all so that we may be one..NOT committing heresy ourselves so that other heretics think we are NICE... Luther was an evil, filthy man who out of pride and huberis didnt work within the Church. Anti-LUTHER??? ABSOLUTELY!!!!

Here's a link about YOUR BOY LUTHER:500 Years of Protestantism: The 38 Most Ridiculous Things Martin Luther Ever Wrote

In addition, the man you are also accusing of lying, Denifle, was a favourite of Leo the XIII and PiusX..So, are they liars also, Mr PAY PER CLICK????

" Denifle's impeachment is no doubt a terrible one, but apart from some trifling inaccuracies in immaterial points it is established by irrefragable proofs." from New Advent.Org...

BTW, the hat is ridiculous... Oh I know Im not charitable, you do not need to point it out..Somebody has to defend others from heretical payper click bullies like yourself..

I co-wrote the piece with Barona and I saw Luther's original writings at the Library of Congress years ago...Have you had that "honour"? Im sure not as you were at the hat store trying to figure out which black hat would fit your enflated noggin. What a hilarious joke this is, that a Patheticaos PAY PER CLICK self-declared theologian comes to a combox to pass Barona's Particular Judgment before he is dead. OH, Im sure Barona's knees are shaking, black-hatted one...

Bring it on , heretic, bring it on... (Conciliar katholics are so funny, thanks for the yuks!)

Mad because this got thousands of hits and you can't get those shekels? What a loser you are... Run back to Patheticos, you might need to write another paltry post so you can buy yourself another latte to go with that patheticos hat.

Barona said...

The following was written by a Dave Armstrong. It has been edited to remove all links to his for-profit blog, as I do NOT allow people to sell anything on this blog. Period.

Mr Armstrong, your comments about Luther's belief that are consistent with Catholicism are irrelevant. You write about what Luther believed. I ask: if we believe 99% of the Gospel but reject one doctrine of Christ, we reject it all. Christ is everything or nothing.

Besides, a Catholic believes because the Church commands him to; a protestant believes because he personally wishes to. The exact same belief, but a totally different reason.

I also find it interesting that you did not address the issue of Luther's hatred of the Mass; which means, the hatred of Christ's Redemptive Action; which means hatred of God's Salvific Plan.


This is a piece of anti-Luther propaganda, and untrue. Bearing false witness is a
serious sin.

Maritain appears to have been drawn this from the virulently anti-Luther Catholic biographer, Heinrich Denifle, who seems to have gratuitously added the description of "rape" to his description of an incident which was simply nuns voluntarily fleeing their convent. See:

Jesuit and Luther biographer Hartmann Grisar (who also wrote a six-volume biography of Luther) recounts the story in his "Martin Luther: His Life and Work" (1925; reprinted in 1930 and 1950: Newman Press; see pp. 233-234) -- I have a hard copy in my own library --, with not the slightest hint of rape.

This was twelve Cistercian nuns who voluntary left a convent at Nimbschen. Grisar commented:

"They were mostly daughters of the nobility, who had been committed to the convent according to custom and hence failed to honor the state of life which they had embraced voluntarily." (p. 234)

Grisar is the far more reputable and objective biographer. And he is scathingly critical of Luther where it is called for, so we can trust his account of this incident.

The breaking of religious vows is, of course, a serious sin, too, in Catholic thought, but that's a separate discussion. Here I am only addressing whether these nuns were raped, and with Luther's approval.

Spreading myths and lies about Luther does nothing to advance Catholicism or ecumenical relations. There are plenty of real issues where Luther was wrong in his theology that can be discussed. I've dealt with them at length, on my Luther web page, which is the most extensive Catholic critique of Luther online.

I also have an extensive page about Lutheranism as well:

Thus no one can claim that I don't take on Protestant errors or Luther himself when he is wrong (from the Catholic standpoint). But I won't countenance lies for a second, because it brings into question our credibility and Christian witness to historical truth and fairness. It's wrong, and we sin if we spread them, having been informed of their inaccurate and defamatory nature.