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.
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.
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
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.
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".
Even in the 30 years war, most of the armies on both sides were not native to the areas.
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.
>> 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.
The ELCA excommunicated Martin Luther too
The ELCA excommunicated Martin Luther too
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.
Martin Luther is responsible for more lost souls than any other person in history
dimwit...prior to the invention of the printing press.....bibles were HAND PRINTED, far beyond the budgets of any but the most affluent......wake up
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Luther was as upset about the unscrupulous manner in which the indulgence was preached (i.e., sold) as he was about the indulgence itself. And that was indeed the act of a few corrupt individuals, no matter how you slice it.
Nowhere, however, do we claim that ordination guarantees either prudence or moral probity. The idea that the Bishop of Mainz and the Pope acted corruptly is not at all a threat to Catholic theology or a contradiction of it.
oh,please
all answers here are on a personal basis...I condenm no-ones beliefs, but I refuse to ignore statements negative to true Christian teachings, just to accomodate those who refuse, in spite of overwhelming evidence, to accept the teachings of Christ, handed down through His ONLY, one Holy catholic and Apostolic church.......you may be misguided, but you have no right to lead others astray.......Period
“Martin Luther is responsible for more lost souls than any other person in history...”
I always believed that distinction belonged to the devil.
No he is not, each man controls his destiny. Luther freed a many of us from oppression and an oligarchy that demanded money for your salvation.
Yeah, all those poor lost souls that nobody paid the corrupt church to save.
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.