“MARTIN LUTHER”

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27641, 23 April 1955, Page 3

“MARTIN LUTHER”

Sir, —After seeing the film “Martin Luther,” I came to the conclusion that the world was at that time suffering very badly from religious mania and has never properly got over it.—Your®, etc., RATIONALIST. April 22, 1955.

Sir, —We in New Zealand should be grateful for the opportunity of seeing the film “Martin Luther” and making

up our own minds as to the truth therein. In many countries they do not have this freedom. While much has been written and spoken about this film, there is no record of any comment from any follower of the Church of Rome who has actually seen it. Perhaps none of them has done so. If not, why not?—Yours, etc., TRUTH SEEKER. April 22, 1955.

Sir, —"The Truth” writes of Luther. “The so-called reformer was but a profligate fanatic.” "The Truth” should learn that it is sinful to set himself up as a judge, for “The Lord (alone) knoweth them that are his.” (2 Timothy, 2.19). As for a Catholic priest to marry a nun, well, why not? "Marriage is honourable in all.” (Hebrews 13.3). If "The Truth” really knew the “pure Gospel” he mentions, he would refrain from all condemnation of others, especially of those who are not here to defend themselves. “Let all evil speaking be put away from you.” (Ephesians 4.31). Yours, etc., PLAIN MAN. April 22, 1955. Sir, —Let us refute the fact that Martin Luther gave the Bible to the German people in their own language. The true fact is that between tne invention of printing, about 1450 and 1522, when Luther published his version of the New Testament, no fewer than 14 complete editions of the Bible were published in the German language. Four more were in Low German, in 50 years up" to 1500 A.D., and 100 editions were printed in Latin. They were printed to be sold; if sold, they were doubtless read. Therefore, 18 editions had appeared in German before Luther’s version. Publishers’ names can be given if required. I should like to inquire why this great hero and champion’s Bible is not used in Protestant churches today.—Yours, etc., FACTS. April 22, 1955.

Sir, — As I am not the person who signed his letter “The Truth” about Martin Luther, I would be obliged if you could find space for this explanation. “Alcuin” appears to think so. In answering "Rationalist,” I signed my letter “Truth. 0 I am not In the least in sympathy with the letter about Luther.—Yours, etc., TROTH. April 22, 1955. Sir,—Let “Alcuin” reject this statement by the late Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. William Temple, at the Malvern Conference, 1941: “It is easy to see how Luther prepared the way for Hitler;” and, indeed, the frenzied self-exaltation of Hitler on the night of June 20, 1934, when he said, “I became Germany,” is equalled by Luther’s proud declaration after the peasants’ rising? “It was I, Martin Luther, who slew all the peasants in the insurrection, for I commanded them to be slaughtered. All their blood is upon my shoulders. But I cast it upon Our Lord God, who commanded me to speak in this way* If this is not sufficient, let him read “Jew Suss,” a novel based on truth (Luther led the Germans with Hitler in Jewish persecution) and the book “Rebuilding a Lost Faith” by John L. Stoddard (Burns Oates), former rationalist, Protestant , Protestant theologians do supply the truth. — Yours, etc., TRUTH, NOT FICTION. April 22, 1955. .

[“P.J.A.” may briefly reply; otherwise, this correspondence is closed. —Ed., “The Press."]