Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

January 3, 1521 - Martin Luther excommunicated
History.com ^ | January 3

Posted on 01/03/2008 8:04:03 AM PST by Sopater

On January 3, 1521, Pope Leo X issues the papal bull Decet Romanum Pontificem, which excommunicates Martin Luther from the Catholic Church.

Martin Luther, the chief catalyst of Protestantism, was a professor of biblical interpretation at the University of Wittenberg in Germany when he drew up his 95 theses condemning the Catholic Church for its corrupt practice of selling indulgences, or the forgiveness of sins. He followed up the revolutionary work with equally controversial and groundbreaking theological works, and his fiery words set off religious reformers all across Europe.

In January 1521, Pope Leo X excommunicated Luther. Three months later, Luther was called to defend his beliefs before Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Worms, where he was famously defiant. For his refusal to recant his writings, the emperor declared him an outlaw and a heretic. Luther was protected by powerful German princes, however, and by his death in 1546, the course of Western civilization had been significantly altered.


TOPICS: Catholic; History; Mainline Protestant; Theology
KEYWORDS: anniversary; luther; lutheran; martinluther
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last
Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences Commonly Known as The 95 Theses by Dr. Martin Luther

Out of love and concern for the truth, and with the object of eliciting it, the following heads will be the subject of a public discussion at Wittenberg under the presidency of the reverend father, Martin Luther, Augustinian, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and duly appointed Lecturer on these subjects in that place. He requests that whoever cannot be present personally to debate the matter orally will do so in absence in writing.

  1. When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said "Repent", He called for the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

  2. The word cannot be properly understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, i.e. confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

  3. Yet its meaning is not restricted to repentance in one's heart; for such repentance is null unless it produces outward signs in various mortifications of the flesh.

  4. As long as hatred of self abides (i.e. true inward repentance) the penalty of sin abides, viz., until we enter the kingdom of heaven.

  5. The pope has neither the will nor the power to remit any penalties beyond those imposed either at his own discretion or by canon law.

  6. The pope himself cannot remit guilt, but only declare and confirm that it has been remitted by God; or, at most, he can remit it in cases reserved to his discretion. Except for these cases, the guilt remains untouched.

  7. God never remits guilt to anyone without, at the same time, making him humbly submissive to the priest, His representative.

  8. The penitential canons apply only to men who are still alive, and, according to the canons themselves, none applies to the dead.

  9. Accordingly, the Holy Spirit, acting in the person of the pope, manifests grace to us, by the fact that the papal regulations always cease to apply at death, or in any hard case.

  10. It is a wrongful act, due to ignorance, when priests retain the canonical penalties on the dead in purgatory.

  11. When canonical penalties were changed and made to apply to purgatory, surely it would seem that tares were sown while the bishops were asleep.

  12. In former days, the canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution was pronounced; and were intended to be tests of true contrition.

  13. Death puts an end to all the claims of the Church; even the dying are already dead to the canon laws, and are no longer bound by them.

  14. Defective piety or love in a dying person is necessarily accompanied by great fear, which is greatest where the piety or love is least.

  15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, whatever else might be said, to constitute the pain of purgatory, since it approaches very closely to the horror of despair.

  16. There seems to be the same difference between hell, purgatory, and heaven as between despair, uncertainty, and assurance.

  17. Of a truth, the pains of souls in purgatory ought to be abated, and charity ought to be proportionately increased.

  18. Moreover, it does not seem proved, on any grounds of reason or Scripture, that these souls are outside the state of merit, or unable to grow in grace.

  19. Nor does it seem proved to be always the case that they are certain and assured of salvation, even if we are very certain ourselves.

  20. Therefore the pope, in speaking of the plenary remission of all penalties, does not mean "all" in the strict sense, but only those imposed by himself.

  21. Hence those who preach indulgences are in error when they say that a man is absolved and saved from every penalty by the pope's indulgences.

  22. Indeed, he cannot remit to souls in purgatory any penalty which canon law declares should be suffered in the present life.

  23. If plenary remission could be granted to anyone at all, it would be only in the cases of the most perfect, i.e. to very few.

  24. It must therefore be the case that the major part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of relief from penalty.

  25. The same power as the pope exercises in general over purgatory is exercised in particular by every single bishop in his bishopric and priest in his parish.

  26. The pope does excellently when he grants remission to the souls in purgatory on account of intercessions made on their behalf, and not by the power of the keys (which he cannot exercise for them).

  27. There is no divine authority for preaching that the soul flies out of the purgatory immediately the money clinks in the bottom of the chest.

  28. It is certainly possible that when the money clinks in the bottom of the chest avarice and greed increase; but when the church offers intercession, all depends in the will of God.

  29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed in view of what is said of St. Severinus and St. Pascal? (Note: Paschal I, pope 817-24. The legend is that he and Severinus were willing to endure the pains of purgatory for the benefit of the faithful).

  30. No one is sure of the reality of his own contrition, much less of receiving plenary forgiveness.

  31. One who bona fide buys indulgence is a rare as a bona fide penitent man, i.e. very rare indeed.

  32. All those who believe themselves certain of their own salvation by means of letters of indulgence, will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

  33. We should be most carefully on our guard against those who say that the papal indulgences are an inestimable divine gift, and that a man is reconciled to God by them.

  34. For the grace conveyed by these indulgences relates simply to the penalties of the sacramental "satisfactions" decreed merely by man.

  35. It is not in accordance with Christian doctrines to preach and teach that those who buy off souls, or purchase confessional licenses, have no need to repent of their own sins.

  36. Any Christian whatsoever, who is truly repentant, enjoys plenary remission from penalty and guilt, and this is given him without letters of indulgence.

  37. Any true Christian whatsoever, living or dead, participates in all the benefits of Christ and the Church; and this participation is granted to him by God without letters of indulgence.

  38. Yet the pope's remission and dispensation are in no way to be despised, for, as already said, they proclaim the divine remission.

  39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, to extol to the people the great bounty contained in the indulgences, while, at the same time, praising contrition as a virtue.

  40. A truly contrite sinner seeks out, and loves to pay, the penalties of his sins; whereas the very multitude of indulgences dulls men's consciences, and tends to make them hate the penalties.

  41. Papal indulgences should only be preached with caution, lest people gain a wrong understanding, and think that they are preferable to other good works: those of love.

  42. Christians should be taught that the pope does not at all intend that the purchase of indulgences should be understood as at all comparable with the works of mercy.

  43. Christians should be taught that one who gives to the poor, or lends to the needy, does a better action than if he purchases indulgences.

  44. Because, by works of love, love grows and a man becomes a better man; whereas, by indulgences, he does not become a better man, but only escapes certain penalties.

  45. Christians should be taught that he who sees a needy person, but passes him by although he gives money for indulgences, gains no benefit from the pope's pardon, but only incurs the wrath of God.

  46. Christians should be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they are bound to retain what is only necessary for the upkeep of their home, and should in no way squander it on indulgences.

  47. Christians should be taught that they purchase indulgences voluntarily, and are not under obligation to do so.

  48. Christians should be taught that, in granting indulgences, the pope has more need, and more desire, for devout prayer on his own behalf than for ready money.

  49. Christians should be taught that the pope's indulgences are useful only if one does not rely on them, but most harmful if one loses the fear of God through them.

  50. Christians should be taught that, if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence-preachers, he would rather the church of St. Peter were reduced to ashes than be built with the skin, flesh, and bones of the sheep.

  51. Christians should be taught that the pope would be willing, as he ought if necessity should arise, to sell the church of St. Peter, and give, too, his own money to many of those from whom the pardon-merchants conjure money.

  52. It is vain to rely on salvation by letters of indulgence, even if the commissary, or indeed the pope himself, were to pledge his own soul for their validity.

  53. Those are enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid the word of God to be preached at all in some churches, in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

  54. The word of God suffers injury if, in the same sermon, an equal or longer time is devoted to indulgences than to that word.

  55. The pope cannot help taking the view that if indulgences (very small matters) are celebrated by one bell, one pageant, or one ceremony, the gospel (a very great matter) should be preached to the accompaniment of a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

  56. The treasures of the church, out of which the pope dispenses indulgences, are not sufficiently spoken of or known among the people of Christ.

  57. That these treasures are not temporal are clear from the fact that many of the merchants do not grant them freely, but only collect them.

  58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, because, even apart from the pope, these merits are always working grace in the inner man, and working the cross, death, and hell in the outer man.

  59. St. Laurence said that the poor were the treasures of the church, but he used the term in accordance with the custom of his own time.

  60. We do not speak rashly in saying that the treasures of the church are the keys of the church, and are bestowed by the merits of Christ.

  61. For it is clear that the power of the pope suffices, by itself, for the remission of penalties and reserved cases.

  62. The true treasure of the church is the Holy gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

  63. It is right to regard this treasure as most odious, for it makes the first to be the last.

  64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is most acceptable, for it makes the last to be the first.

  65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets which, in former times, they used to fish for men of wealth.

  66. The treasures of the indulgences are the nets to-day which they use to fish for men of wealth.

  67. The indulgences, which the merchants extol as the greatest of favours, are seen to be, in fact, a favourite means for money-getting.

  68. Nevertheless, they are not to be compared with the grace of God and the compassion shown in the Cross.

  69. Bishops and curates, in duty bound, must receive the commissaries of the papal indulgences with all reverence.

  70. But they are under a much greater obligation to watch closely and attend carefully lest these men preach their own fancies instead of what the pope commissioned.

  71. Let him be anathema and accursed who denies the apostolic character of the indulgences.

  72. On the other hand, let him be blessed who is on his guard against the wantonness and license of the pardon-merchant's words.

  73. In the same way, the pope rightly excommunicates those who make any plans to the detriment of the trade in indulgences.

  74. It is much more in keeping with his views to excommunicate those who use the pretext of indulgences to plot anything to the detriment of holy love and truth.

  75. It is foolish to think that papal indulgences have so much power that they can absolve a man even if he has done the impossible and violated the mother of God.

  76. We assert the contrary, and say that the pope's pardons are not able to remove the least venial of sins as far as their guilt is concerned.

  77. When it is said that not even St. Peter, if he were now pope, could grant a greater grace, it is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.

  78. We assert the contrary, and say that he, and any pope whatever, possesses greater graces, viz., the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as is declared in I Corinthians 12 [:28].

  79. It is blasphemy to say that the insignia of the cross with the papal arms are of equal value to the cross on which Christ died.

  80. The bishops, curates, and theologians, who permit assertions of that kind to be made to the people without let or hindrance, will have to answer for it.

  81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult for learned men to guard the respect due to the pope against false accusations, or at least from the keen criticisms of the laity.

  82. They ask, e.g.: Why does not the pope liberate everyone from purgatory for the sake of love (a most holy thing) and because of the supreme necessity of their souls? This would be morally the best of all reasons. Meanwhile he redeems innumerable souls for money, a most perishable thing, with which to build St. Peter's church, a very minor purpose.

  83. Again: Why should funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continue to be said? And why does not the pope repay, or permit to be repaid, the benefactions instituted for these purposes, since it is wrong to pray for those souls who are now redeemed?

  84. Again: Surely this is a new sort of compassion, on the part of God and the pope, when an impious man, an enemy of God, is allowed to pay money to redeem a devout soul, a friend of God; while yet that devout and beloved soul is not allowed to be redeemed without payment, for love's sake, and just because of its need of redemption.

  85. Again: Why are the penitential canon laws, which in fact, if not in practice, have long been obsolete and dead in themselves,—why are they, to-day, still used in imposing fines in money, through the granting of indulgences, as if all the penitential canons were fully operative?

  86. Again: since the pope's income to-day is larger than that of the wealthiest of wealthy men, why does he not build this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of indigent believers?

  87. Again: What does the pope remit or dispense to people who, by their perfect repentance, have a right to plenary remission or dispensation?

  88. Again: Surely a greater good could be done to the church if the pope were to bestow these remissions and dispensations, not once, as now, but a hundred times a day, for the benefit of any believer whatever.

  89. What the pope seeks by indulgences is not money, but rather the salvation of souls; why then does he suspend the letters and indulgences formerly conceded, and still as efficacious as ever?

  90. These questions are serious matters of conscience to the laity. To suppress them by force alone, and not to refute them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christian people unhappy.

  91. If therefore, indulgences were preached in accordance with the spirit and mind of the pope, all these difficulties would be easily overcome, and indeed, cease to exist.

  92. Away, then, with those prophets who say to Christ's people, "Peace, peace," where in there is no peace.

  93. Hail, hail to all those prophets who say to Christ's people, "The cross, the cross," where there is no cross.

  94. Christians should be exhorted to be zealous to follow Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hells.

  95. And let them thus be more confident of entering heaven through many tribulations rather than through a false assurance of peace.


1 posted on 01/03/2008 8:04:06 AM PST by Sopater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Good day in history.


2 posted on 01/03/2008 8:13:07 AM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

A perfect example of an insular Vatican not seeing the growing fire all around them...


3 posted on 01/03/2008 8:22:21 AM PST by BigEdLB (BigEd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

“There is no divine authority for preaching that the soul flies out of the purgatory immediately the money clinks in the bottom of the chest.”

What a heretic! /s


4 posted on 01/03/2008 8:23:04 AM PST by Augustinian monk (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk; BigEdLB; Resolute Conservative

It should be noted that Luther was condemned for refusing to retract only 41 out of the 95, less than half.


5 posted on 01/03/2008 8:27:18 AM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk

That was a legitimate criticism of an abuse, an abuse which was subsequently condemned by the Council of Trent.


6 posted on 01/03/2008 8:28:10 AM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
Martin Luther excommunicated

Boy, if you could turn back the clock

7 posted on 01/03/2008 8:29:23 AM PST by Nonstatist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
For his refusal to recant his writings, the emperor declared him an outlaw and a heretic.

I didn't think civil authorities had the authority to make theological pronouncements.

8 posted on 01/03/2008 8:29:32 AM PST by Alex Murphy ("Therefore the prudent keep silent at that time, for it is an evil time." - Amos 5:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk; BigEdLB; Resolute Conservative

Correction: It was 41 errors, some based on the 95 theses, not 41 out of the 95.


9 posted on 01/03/2008 8:31:35 AM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
...was a professor of biblical interpretation at the University of Wittenberg in Germany...

Had not Johann Gutenberg not perfected the system of printing via movable type, Martin Luther might not even have had a Bible to interpret. Prior to Gutenberg, the Roman Catholic Church controlled access to the Bible. I maintain the Internet will eventually have as great an impact on civilization as has movable type. Lol, maybe the History Channel needs to do a show on "Bible Tech."

10 posted on 01/03/2008 8:37:26 AM PST by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
It was 41 errors, some based on the 95 theses

Are these listed somewhere?
11 posted on 01/03/2008 8:42:32 AM PST by Sopater (A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left. ~ Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: abb
Prior to Gutenberg, the Roman Catholic Church controlled access to the Bible.

Because the Bibles were sometimes chained in the Church? Didn't anyone who thought that ever think that before Gutenberg, books were expensive objects to produce and objects liable to theft?

12 posted on 01/03/2008 8:48:12 AM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
Exsurge Domine
13 posted on 01/03/2008 8:48:59 AM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: lightman

Standing-up-for-the-Gospel ping.


14 posted on 01/03/2008 8:53:00 AM PST by Charles Henrickson (Lutheran pastor, LCMS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aberaussie; Aeronaut; AlternateViewpoint; AnalogReigns; Archie Bunker on steroids; Arrowhead1952; ..


Lutheran Ping!
15 posted on 01/03/2008 9:27:23 AM PST by lightman (The Office of the Keys should be exercised as some ministry needs to be Exorcised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

I have heard that Martin Luther died a very lonely and unhappy man.


16 posted on 01/03/2008 9:47:41 AM PST by GinaLolaB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lightman

And who will speak against the Indulgences of the ELCA?


17 posted on 01/03/2008 9:54:21 AM PST by SmithL (Fred!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GinaLolaB
"I have heard that Martin Luther died a very lonely and unhappy man."

Where did you hear that? I have read several biograhies of Luther and virtually all his theological writings and commentaries. (what a tragedy Luther didn't write more Bible commentaries. His commentaries on Romans and Galatians were brilliant and in my opinion better than Calvin's commentaries). Nowhere have I heard he died an unhappy man. In fact, his table talk series indicates the exact opposite.

18 posted on 01/03/2008 10:46:44 AM PST by joebuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
"I didn't think civil authorities had the authority to make theological pronouncements."

I believe it was King Charles the fifth of Saxony who was the presiding Judge at the Diet of Worms.

19 posted on 01/03/2008 10:52:34 AM PST by joebuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

The emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (which Descartes called not holy, Roman, or an empire) had in fact little legal authority, except to name someone an “outlaw” within his own particular kingdom...(in fact a minority of the HRE). “Outlaw” was a phrase used at the time for someone not out of the control of the law, but, rather someone not protected by the law.

Hence in Charles V’s kingdom, Luther could have been arrested and killed, without normal legal protections. Even though Saxony where Luther lived was a part of the HRE, his own king, Elector Frederick(”the Wise”), while always a Roman Catholic, did not hand him over to Charles V, or papal authorities, as it would have been a political insult to have one of his star professors burned as an outlaw by the Roman Catholic secular authorities.

Standard procedure of the day was that the Church court of the Inquisition could determine if someone was a heretic, and if so, then they would be declared outlaw by the secular authorities, and then burned by those same secular authorities.

The Roman Church could then claim it never killed anyone....(and of course in burning, techinically their blood was not shed...)


20 posted on 01/03/2008 11:01:36 AM PST by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Shouldn’t this be in “Breaking News?”


21 posted on 01/03/2008 11:04:12 AM PST by CholeraJoe ("At last my arm is complete!" Sweeney Todd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
Martin Luther, the chief catalyst of Protestantism, was a professor of biblical interpretation at the University of Wittenberg in Germany when he drew up his 95 theses condemning the Catholic Church for its corrupt practice of selling indulgences, or the forgiveness of sins.

And the misconceptions continue today. Sad. Or, perhaps the sentence is just written poorly. I guess I'll assume that for the sake of charity.

For the record though, "indulgences" are not a "sin for free card", nor are they "forgiveness of sin". They pay for the temporal, not eternal, consequence of sin that a just God demands. His Son was (and is) the only one that can pay for the eternal consequence; but just as when you break a window, you should pay to get it fixed (even if its owner forgives you) to be just, when you sin against God, to be wholly just and pure, you are not only asked to pay for the eternal consequence (which only the Son can do for you), but also the temporal consequence (which you either do through prayer and good works of your own or by tapping into the unlimited merit gained by the Saints before you, via indulgences, or by time in Purgatory).

And indulgences could never be bought or sold in the Church before Luther; it was the acts of a few corrupt individuals that did that, not official Church policy; so the Church didn't "change" then either.

But these facts are always dismissed by those all to eager to disparage the Church for whatever (usual) personal reason.

22 posted on 01/03/2008 11:16:14 AM PST by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven
And indulgences could never be bought or sold in the Church before Luther; it was the acts of a few corrupt individuals that did that, not official Church policy; so the Church didn't "change" then either.

When the bishops were absentee caretakers & Rome didn't bother with discipline, what does official church teaching mean if it's not the truth on the ground? In the places where the corrupt & undereducated were running the show, corruption & neglect becomes the default understanding by a share of the flock.

23 posted on 01/03/2008 11:59:12 AM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven
it was the acts of a few corrupt individuals that did that, not official Church policy; so the Church didn't "change" then either.

Are we talking about indulgences here or pedophile priests? Often times the policy is set by how the authorities deal with said "corrupt individuals" as this is sometimes the primary interface with those who are to interpret the policies, even if they are "unofficial".
24 posted on 01/03/2008 12:07:57 PM PST by Sopater (A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left. ~ Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Considering Marty’s obsession with excrement (wrote several treatises on the subject), it should have been called the “95 Feces.”


25 posted on 01/03/2008 12:10:32 PM PST by Clemenza (Ronald Reagan was a "Free Traitor", Like Me ;-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
Since the Roman Church didn’t denounce all 95 of the Theses, that excrement being thrown is getting thrown at some of the official teachings of Rome.
26 posted on 01/03/2008 12:19:19 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly

Not even a Christian, just pointing out one of the eccentricities of Friar Martin.


27 posted on 01/03/2008 12:21:17 PM PST by Clemenza (Ronald Reagan was a "Free Traitor", Like Me ;-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
Really?

BTW, "excrement" does not equal "feces".

Feces, faeces, or fæces (see spelling differences) is a waste product from an animal's digestive tract expelled through the anus (or cloaca) during defecation.

Excretion is the process of eliminating waste products of metabolism and other non-useful materials.[1] It is an essential process in all forms of life. It contrasts secretion, where the substance may have specific tasks after leaving the cell.

In humans, the two major excretory processes are the formation of urine in the kidneys and the formation of carbon dioxide (a human's abundant metabolic waste) molecules as a result of respiration, which is then exhaled from the lungs. These waste products are eliminated by urination and exhalation respectively.

28 posted on 01/03/2008 12:22:16 PM PST by Sopater (A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left. ~ Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

1517-1521: Martin Luther’s preaching divides Bavaria and Germany.
1529: Muslims sweep across Bavaria, laying siege to Vienna.

Care to speculate why the Bavarian regions of Germany are Catholic, whereas the Northern regions are Lutheran?

I’ll give you hint: the defenders of civilization included Poles, Italians, Spaniards, Austrians, Hungarians, Lithuanians, Portuguese... Hmmm... Wherever did the Germans go? Oh, Henry? Henry? Wherefore art thou, Henry? Whatever was King Henry doing in the 1530s? Gustav?


29 posted on 01/03/2008 12:32:05 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Yes, actually most are enthusiastically proclaimed by the Catholic Church. You’ll notice that at this stage, Luther even proclaims the efficacy of indulgences, and speaks as on the side of the pope! (”Those are enemies of Christ, and the Pope, who...”)


30 posted on 01/03/2008 12:38:23 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Closer to Rome and the thumb of the church.


31 posted on 01/03/2008 12:40:44 PM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: BigEdLB

>> A perfect example of an insular Vatican not seeing the growing fire all around them... <<

Well, it WAS in Rome, quite many days’ journey away (and through the treacherous Switzerland). Certainly, the result would have been preferably if Rome had been as adept at hailing the many important truths of Luther as they were at condemning the errors. But then also the results would have been far more preferable if Luther had deviated from the Theses towards Rome a fraction as much as he deviated from them to oppose Rome, allowing himself to be manipulated by scoundrel lords who simply saw him as an excuse to abandon their defense of civilization, using him much as liberals used budget concerns in the 1980s to oppose defense budgets.


32 posted on 01/03/2008 12:43:19 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

And having nothing to do with the Muslim armies occupying their lands or their neighboring lands? That’s right: In 1529, Islam lay between Germany and Rome. And Luther pronounced Mohammed preferable to the Pope.


33 posted on 01/03/2008 12:45:20 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dangus
1517-1521: Martin Luther’s preaching divides Bavaria and Germany.

Henry, had been forced by the Church to cede most of his holdings on the continent & his excommunication was an open invitation to any prince in good standing with the Church to claim his crown. Good Catholics were a greater risk to him than the Muslims were.

Prussian princes had been made vassals with the help of the Church a mere few centuries earlier. Holy Roman Emperor indeed.

34 posted on 01/03/2008 12:52:36 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dangus
And Luther pronounced Mohammed preferable to the Pope.

German's knew what the yoke of the Pope felt like, after Rome sent the sword to convert the last pagan hold outs in Europe.

35 posted on 01/03/2008 12:57:07 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dangus
Well, it WAS in Rome, quite many days’ journey away (and through the treacherous Switzerland).

Best be able to handle the size chunk you've bit off, else you may end up choking yourself. Citing Rome's distance from portions of Her flock almost looks like support for the Eastern Orthodoxy's position that amounted to greater local control.

Certainly, the result would have been preferably if Rome had been as adept at hailing the many important truths of Luther as they were at condemning the errors.

If he'd been Italian or French instead of German they might have taken him more seriously.

But then also the results would have been far more preferable if Luther had deviated from the Theses towards Rome a fraction as much as he deviated from them to oppose Rome, allowing himself to be manipulated by scoundrel lords who simply saw him as an excuse to abandon their defense of civilization,

Those in the south didn't exactly consider Germans to be part of civilization, so what exactly were those German prince's "abandoning", a culture that mostly despised them?

36 posted on 01/03/2008 1:53:19 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dangus
You’ll notice that at this stage, Luther even proclaims the efficacy of indulgences, and speaks as on the side of the pope!

Are you sure about that? I'm no scholar on Luther, but I've heard that he had a penchant for sarcasm, and the way I read these Theses, they are just dripping with it.

37 posted on 01/03/2008 1:55:08 PM PST by Zero Sum (Liberalism: The damage ends up being a thousand times the benefit! (apologies to Rabbi Benny Lau))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly

>> Best be able to handle the size chunk you’ve bit off, else you may end up choking yourself. Citing Rome’s distance from portions of Her flock almost looks like support for the Eastern Orthodoxy’s position that amounted to greater local control. <<

I’ll only defend Rome inasfar as doctrine; I’ll cede many a point about bad governance.

>> If he’d been Italian or French instead of German they might have taken him more seriously. <<

Or perhaps had he lacked his tendency towards provocation, sarcasm, and exaggeration that are cited by his defenders as explanations for his more outrageous comments.

>> Those in the south didn’t exactly consider Germans to be part of civilization, so what exactly were those German prince’s “abandoning”, a culture that mostly despised them? <<

Uh, the conflict against the Muslims?


38 posted on 01/03/2008 2:30:13 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Zero Sum

Does this sound sarcastic?

“The pope does excellently when he grants remission to the souls in purgatory on account of intercessions made on their behalf, and not by the power of the keys (which he cannot exercise for them).”

In that passage he seems to be arguing that the pope has no authority to release souls from purgatory himself, but he does seem to assert that intercessions are effective in granting remission to the souls in purgatory.


39 posted on 01/03/2008 2:33:07 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
I didn't think civil authorities had the authority to make theological pronouncements.

Today, not.  But as I understand it, in 1521, the Bishop of Rome claimed authority of Emperors, Kings, Dukes, and all civil government.  Kings were only vassals and representatives of Rome.

40 posted on 01/03/2008 2:54:27 PM PST by Celtman (It's never right to do wrong to do right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dangus
I’ll only defend Rome inasfar as doctrine; I’ll cede many a point about bad governance.

Her model of hierarchy is part of Her doctrine, so I can't see how you can separate the two.

Or perhaps had he lacked his tendency towards provocation, sarcasm, and exaggeration that are cited by his defenders as explanations for his more outrageous comments.

All of those traits are things I associate with normal interaction between my very German relatives.

Uh, the conflict against the Muslims?

To outsiders, Muslims, snotty folks from the south that look down their noses at you & consider you to be nuttin but simpletons, six of one, half a dozen of the other. The swords that each wields are similarly sharp. The guy who has stood with his boot on your neck asking you to defend him... I'm sure the first thing you'd consider would be to rush to his aid.

41 posted on 01/03/2008 3:02:14 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: joebuck
Where did you hear that?

A Roman Catholic priest told me that. The priest also explained to me about how all of the protestant churches not only dislike Catholics but they are in war with each other. Each protestant congregation you see is fighting with all of the other protestant congregations on the same street and in the same town.

From the web:

“Luther was unhappy about the diversity appearing among the Protestants. He was no defender of choice in religious conviction. He believed that God had spoken clearly and that no excuse existed for deviation. Truth for Luther was not a matter of interpretation. Truth for Luther was absolute and people who strayed from that truth were in error.” http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/h18-eu.html

42 posted on 01/03/2008 3:26:10 PM PST by GinaLolaB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GinaLolaB
Your Priest doesn't know anything about Luther. The web site just said he was unhappy about protestant diversity but that's a long way from saying he died an "unhappy" man. There are lots of things in this world I'm unhappy about but I'm not an unhappy man. Further, to say protestant congregations are at war with each other is absurd. The only wars going on are within certain denominations over the apostasy being committed. This same traditionalist/liberal "war" is seen within the Catholic Church here in the states.

Even the diversity of protestants during the reformation was not that great. The only real difference between the theology of Luther and Calvin was over the sacraments, primarily the Eucharist. As a matter of doctrine I see little difference between Augustine, Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and Knox.

43 posted on 01/03/2008 3:46:00 PM PST by joebuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: dangus
Does this sound sarcastic?

I don't know; I find Luther to be difficult to read. Apparently he switches quite often between sincerity and sarcasm, and I find it difficult to follow. For example:

Christians should be taught that, if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence-preachers, he would rather the church of St. Peter were reduced to ashes than be built with the skin, flesh, and bones of the sheep.

Christians should be taught that the pope would be willing, as he ought if necessity should arise, to sell the church of St. Peter, and give, too, his own money to many of those from whom the pardon-merchants conjure money.

Now was Luther really this naive about the pope? I don't think so, but I could be wrong. Anyway, since I'm such a simpleton I find it much more edifying to read those Christian fathers whose "yes" meant "yes" and whose "no" meant "no".

44 posted on 01/03/2008 4:45:27 PM PST by Zero Sum (Liberalism: The damage ends up being a thousand times the benefit! (apologies to Rabbi Benny Lau))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: dangus
At the time, the German states (there was no real united Germany until the late 1800’s) were the military laughing stock of Europe. They weren’t much of a factor in the wars of the time.

Even in the 30 years war, most of the armies on both sides were not native to the areas.

45 posted on 01/03/2008 5:16:52 PM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

The Bishop of Meinz—one of the most powerful Bishop/princes (he had substantial political power) of Europe, with the express (though secret...now proven) collusion of the Pope himself—through the use of his bankers, “was[sic] the acts of a few corrupt individuals???”

These were the men behind the plenary indulgence that so PO’d Luther. Hardly an isolated individuals—rather at the heart of establishment of the 16th Century Roman church.


46 posted on 01/03/2008 6:07:50 PM PST by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly

>> Her model of hierarchy is part of Her doctrine, so I can’t see how you can separate the two. <<

“Governance,” not “government.” A government can be a fine model (say, the USA), and yet the governance be poor (say, Jimmuh Carter’s administration). The crucial aspect of the form of Papal government is that it a means for the infallibility of doctrine, not effectiveness of administration.

>> To outsiders, Muslims, snotty folks from the south that look down their noses at you & consider you to be nuttin but simpletons, six of one, half a dozen of the other. <<

And therein lies the evil of Luther’s movement; it was based on an understandable but all-too human reaction, not on doctrine.


47 posted on 01/03/2008 6:14:37 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

The ELCA excommunicated Martin Luther too


48 posted on 01/03/2008 7:00:37 PM PST by Archie Bunker on steroids (Hillary Supporters ....... Fags and Hags)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

The ELCA excommunicated Martin Luther too


49 posted on 01/03/2008 7:01:36 PM PST by Archie Bunker on steroids (Hillary Supporters ....... Fags and Hags)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dangus
And therein lies the evil of Luther’s movement; it was based on an understandable but all-too human reaction, not on doctrine.

Rome's doctrine in that area at that time seems to been something along the lines of neglect & greed, because the simpletons deserved no better.

That part of the flock wasn't getting fed. You guys sometimes have a real funny idea about evil.

50 posted on 01/03/2008 7:13:01 PM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson