Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

The 95 Theses and their Results (1517-1519)

Background

From 1514 Luther was not only theology professor at Wittenberg University but also the priest at the City Church in Wittenberg. So he was also responsible for the salvation of his parish.

Luther observed that many people in Wittenberg were not coming to him for confession any more. They were going to towns in Brandenburg or Anhalt like Jüterbog or Zerbst to buy Indulgences (primarily the Peter's Indulgence).

The practice of buying indulgences, which quasi replaced confession and allowed people to buy their salvation, was completely repulsive to Luther. He strongly believed that one lived a life of humility in order to receive God's grace.

The rest of the story

Martin Luther changed the face of the "church " with a nail, and a piece of paper

I thought it might be interesting to see how all of us would see those articles today..

1 posted on 05/02/2002 10:18:42 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Claud; dadwags ;SoothingDave;al_c;Notwithstanding...
For discussion... Looking at it today, are there things modern Catholics can agree with? Are there things that the diverse protestant body disagrees with.?
2 posted on 05/02/2002 10:22:29 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RnMomof7; Catholic_list
MYTHS ABOUT INDULGENCES by James Akin

Myth 1: A person can buy his way out of hell with indulgences.

This is a common misunderstanding, one that-anti-Catholic commentators take advantage of, relying on the ignorance of both Catholics and non-Catholics. But the charge is without foundation. Since indulgences remit only temporal penalties, they cannot remit the eternal penalty of hell. Once a person is in hell, no amount of indulgences will ever change that fact. The only way to avoid hell is by appealing to God's eternal mercy while still alive. After death, one's eternal fate is set (Heb. 9:27).

Myth 2: A person can buy indulgences for sins not yet committed.

The Church has always taught that indulgences do not apply to sins not yet committed. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes, "[An indulgence] is not a permission to commit sin, nor a pardon of future sin; neither could be granted by any power."

Myth 3: A person can "buy forgiveness" with indulgences.

The definition of indulgences presupposes that forgiveness has already taken place: "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven" (Indulgentarium Doctrina norm 1). Indulgences in no way forgive sins. They deal only with punishments left after sins have been forgiven.

Myth 4: Indulgences were invented to money for the Church.

Indulgences developed from reflection on the sacrament of reconciliation. They are a way of shortening the penance of sacramental discipline and were in use centuries before money-related problems appeared.

Myth 5: An indulgence will shorten your time in purgatory by a fixed number of days.

The number of days which used to be attached to indulgences were references to the period of penance one might undergo during life on earth. The Catholic Church does not claim to know anything about how long or short purgatory is in general, much less in a specific person's case.

Myth 6: A person can buy indulgences.

The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, "in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions" (Catholic Encyclopedia). This act proved the Church's seriousness about removing abuses from indulgences.

Myth 7: A person used to be able to buy indulgences.

One never could "buy" indulgences. The financial scandal around indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms-indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic Encyclopedia states: "[I]t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded."

This article was taken from the November 1994 issue of "This Rock," published by Catholic Answers, P.O. Box 17490, San Diego, CA 92177, (619) 541-1131, $24.00 per year. Used by Permission. Copyright (c) 1996 by James Akin. All Rights Reserved.

6 posted on 05/03/2002 12:45:50 AM PDT by oremus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RnMomof7
We need a Luther with a nail today.
11 posted on 05/03/2002 6:40:04 AM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RnMomof7
Luther, as evidenced by his own writings, was emotionally imbalanced.

"Most Holy Father, prostrate at the feet of your Holiness, I offer myself with all that I am and have . . . I will acknowledge thy voice as the voice of Christ."
{Letter to Pope Leo X, May 30, 1518}

"The true Antichrist, according to Paul, reigns in the Roman Court: I think I am able to prove that he [the Pope] is now worse than the Turks."
{Letter to Wenceslaus Link, December 11, 1518}

"I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted . . . It is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better."
{Letter to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519}

"I do not know whether the Pope is Antichrist himself, or his Apostle: so miserably is Christ (that is, truth) corrupted and crucified by him in the decrees."
{Letter to Georg Spalatin, March 13, 1519}

Inasmuch as I know for certain that I am right, I will be judge above you and above all the angels, as St. Paul says, that whoever does not accept my doctrine cannot be saved. For it is the doctrine of God, and not my doctrine; therefore my judgment also is God's and not mine . . . It would be better that all bishops were murdered, and all abbeys and cloisters razed to the ground, than that one soul should perish . . . If they will not listen to God's Word . . . what can more justly befall them than a violent upheaval which shall root them out of the earth? And we would smile did it happen. All who contribute body, goods . . . that the rule of the bishops may be destroyed are God's dear children and true Christians. {Against the Falsely So-Called Spiritual Estate of the Pope and Bishops, July 1522}

The Orthodox vs. The Heterodox Luther

16 posted on 05/03/2002 8:51:30 AM PDT by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RnMomof7
Thanks for a good post on a fresh topic. Soli Deo Gloria.
29 posted on 05/03/2002 7:51:54 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RnMomof7
nice post ma, bump for later read
31 posted on 05/04/2002 2:54:38 AM PDT by Revelation 911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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