No, I think he had good intentions. He wanted reform in the Church, which in some ways it did at the time, but not in terms of doctrine, as some of Luther’s ideas posed. Luther wanted the Church to change to what he thought on doctrine, because he thought he knew better than the pope. When the Church would not accept it, he was excommunicated and started his own ecclesiastical body, and other followers later joined. And due to his perversion of thought, it bread other bodies of believers who followed their own interpretations. And then it just spread. The reason is people like the idea of control, so control over what you believe would fall under that.
The devil seeing that this sort of disturbances could not last, has devised a new one; and begins to rage in his members, I mean in the ungodly, through whom he makes his way in all sorts of chimerial follies and extravagant doctrines. This won't have baptism, that denies the efficacy of the Lord's supper; a third puts a world between this and the last judgment; others teach that Jesus Christ is not God; some say this, others that; and **there are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads**.
I must cite one instance, by way of exemplification, for I have plenty to do with these sort of spirits. There is not one of them that does not think himself more learned than Luther; they all try to win their spurs against me; and would to heaven that they were all such as they think themselves, and that I were nothing! The one of whom I speak assured me, amongst other things, that he was sent to me by the God of heaven and earth, and talked most magnificently, but the clown peeped through all. At last, he ordered me to read the books of Moses. I asked for a sign in confirmation of this order, "It is," said he, "written in the gospel of St. John." By this time I had heard enough, and I told him to come again, for that we should not have time, just now, to read the books of Moses. . . .
I have plenty to do in the course of the year with these poor people: the devil could not have found a better pretext for tormenting me. As yet the world had been full of those clamorous spirits without bodies, who oppressed the souls of men; now they have bodies, and give themselves out for living angels. . . .
**When the pope reigned we heard nothing of these troubles**. The strong one (the devil) was in peace in his fortress; but now that a stronger one than he is come, and prevails against him and drives him out, as the Gospel says, he storms and comes forth with noise and fury.*and
Would it have been possible for Luther and the Church to go forward together? I think so, if his concerns about the indulgence question had been addressed in the beginning as they were at the Council of Trent – several years after his death.
The link contains a letter by Luther written to Pope Leo X in 1518.
That’s a Catholic “urban legend” with no foundation I know of, though it’s often repeated.
Yes, thankfully, it appears that this board is educated enough that no one is arguing that “urban legend”.
An intriguing letter. It does not appear Luther held strong to this closing comment from that letter: “Wherefore, most blessed Father, I cast myself at the feet of your Holiness, with all that I have and all that I am. Quicken, kill, call, recall, approve, reprove, as you will. In your voice I shall recognize the voice of Christ directing you and speaking in you.”
Can you imagine if Martin Luther would have withstood the storm…and how it could have changed the landscape of present-day Christendom? Something to think about…
Yes, and it’s not clear that he meant it even then. It was the sort of thing you were supposed to say to the Pope.
What was Luther’s attitude toward the Pope at this time? Was he more or less antagonistic towards him at this point in time?
Luther had problems with authority and while the Catholic Church did not have the very best Popes in that time period, Luther did focus his frustration, anger and blame on the Pope. The idea that the Pope was the antichrist or that the Catholic church was the Whore of Babylon was from Luther. While he tried to get rid of one Pope, he regretted later in his life that he made 100 more.
I also think a lot of Luther’s break had to do with culture. From what i’ve studied, many Germans were not happy with the money they were giving to the church going to Rome, instead of staying in Germany (or more specifically, the German kingdoms, since there was no German nation at the time). So in a sense, Luther either wanted this, or played up the idea that his church would be a local German church, rather than having people send money to Rome.
Hard to be sure. The letter he sent two years later, when he was on the verge of excommunication, protests personal respect for Leo (again, in terms that may be stereotyped and exaggerated) but absolutely none for his office (indeed, this may have been Luther’s deliberate, ironic reversal of the Catholic view that the office should be respected even if the person isn’t worthy of respect).