Yea no idea what you're talking about.
My opposition towards Martin Luther is based on the simple fact that he's a heretic.
Of course, the RC Denomination simply proclaims that whatever SELF says is the definition of Truth - ergo, if any view is different that what self believes, that one is automatically, by definition, wrong.
Embracing that rubric, as you do and MUST to be a Catholic, yes - Luther was wrong. Of course, if others were egotistical enough to do the same, if they also needed to replace the issue of truth with that of the power of self, then we'd all just be locked into positions with no idea (or concern) if any one was correct, locked into division, and potentially locked into error. He who declares SELF can't be wrong cannot be corrected.
He had a completely false definition of "Faith" and altered the Book of St. James to support such and that was only after he didn't have the means to effectively remove the Book of St. James from Sacred Scripture altogether.
1. See the above.
2. He had the biblical definition of faith. MY experience is that Catholics who declare it wrong simply don't know what it was, but again, if truth is declared irrelevant, replaced by the unmitigated, unaccountable, authoritarian POWER that self alone declares that self alone has, if self declares that self alone can't be wrong and thus can't be taught, then the issue of what Luther ACTUALLY taught is irrelevant, isn't it?
3. You are showing your ignorance of history. In Luther's day, the canon was not regarded as dogmatically "set." In any case, you don't seem to know that Luther INCLUDED James in his translation, INCLUDED it in the lectionary, and taught that it IS Scripture. You probably also don't know that he included the RCC's own unique set of DEUTERO books - before your Denomination officially embraced them. The reality is: Lutherans have NEVER officially declared what books are NOT Scripture - we embrace 66 books since they are ECUMENICALLY and historically embraced, and while our Confessions purposely say NOTHING about this topic at all (this is a topic for an Ecumenical Council - and there hasn't been one since the 8th Century), some Lutheran denominations say they embrace those 66 Books as Scripture (as a denomination!) BUT none...NONE.... to my knowledge says "These books are NOT Scripture." The same is true in all the Protestant denominations known to me.
Your statements here are not only incorrect but misleading.
He created his own canon of "disputed" books of the Bible.
The ONLY ones known to me that have done what you rebuke are the RCC and LDS. Both have a canon that NONE but SELF agrees with.
Luther NEVER "created" or even embraced a canon - unique or otherwise. The Lutheran Confessions PURPOSELY don't declare what is and is not Scripture AT ALL.
As you often do, you are attempting to point one figure at others (entirely falsely in most cases) while pointing 3 back at yourself (powerfully correct).
I'm just not some slave to influence.
Me neither. It's why I left your denomination.
Read your Catechism # 87. To be a Catholic, you MUST be a slave to influence, exclusively of the Denomination that so demands it of you.
Martin Luther was no more someone to be idolized that the corrupt clergy of my past.
Compare that to CCC #85 and 87. Compare it to "The Handbook of The Catholic Faith" page 151, "When someone asks for the substantiation for the Catholic believe, the correct answer is: 'The authoritative teachings of The Catholic Church.' This consists of the bishops of The Catholic Church in communion with the Catholic Pope. The Catholic is thus freed from the typically Protestant question of 'is it true' and instead rests in quiet certainty that what The Catholic Church teaches is the teaching of Jesus since Christ himself said, 'Whoever hears you hears me'."
As for idolizing, when self essentially equates self with God, when self alone declares that self alone is essentially the Body of Christ, when self alone declares that self alone is the vicar of God, is that "idolizing?"
The divisions we gather under are matters of orthodoxy not necessarily membership in the Body of Christ.
.... the Protestant position.
Sure, there are a lot of CHRISTIANS (parts of the church) that associate in congregations that are affiliated with a denomination - The Catholic Church. Nothin' wrong with that. But those congregations and that denomination have NOTHING to do with the church, the church that is one, holy, catholic, communion of saints (as Protestants refer to it).