J
joshrp
Guest
A lot of Protestants didn’t believe in evangelization, figuring that God already knows who He is going to save and who will be damned.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
Petergee
Guest
She did. She invited every protestant leader. In fact that was the reason that the Council was held in Trent (on the border between the (often stridently anti-papal) Venetian Republic and the German Empire, rather than in the Papal States. They could get to Trent without passing through any Catholic-ruled territory.I believe that the Lutheran Reformation did good because it got the Roman Church to take a hard look at itself and hold the Council of Trent and codify its doctrines. I do decry the others that caused more harm than Luther such as Zwingli, Karlstadt, Müntzer, Schwenkfeld, Calvin and some others. It is too bad that the Church didn’t hold the Council of Trent and invite Luther with a safe conduct sooner.
But not one protestant bothered to turn up. Luther was too busy vilifying the pope as “the anti-Christ” and the Catholic Church as “the whore of Babylon” etc. In between publishing the most vicious anti-semitic diatribes ever written by somebody claiming to be a Christian, and his ringing endorsements of the German princes bloodily crushing the peasants who were demanding a fairer go.
P
Petergee
Guest
a. Tetzel did nothing wrong. Luther terrorised this pious monk into cowering in a monastery.While it is true that Luther was neurotic about his salvation and he was trying to assuage his terror, his doctrines were more a reaction to widespread abuses in the Catholic hierarchy. The faithful were being grossly misled and were not being taught the faith. His own witness of the corruption when he was in Rome, and the activities of Tetzel, supported by the Pope, pushed him to extremes. The reality of Catholicism he saw was very different than the one we see today.
b. There were abuses in the Church as there are today and in every age. Many other Catholics like St Thomas More and Erasmus were fighting to stamp out the abuses. They didn’t for a momnet think that it would be necessary to change Catholic doctrines to do so.
c. In what way can any of Luther’s novel doctrines be characterised as “a reaction to abuses”? The changes Luther made only created more widespread and worse abuses.
P
Petergee
Guest
Indulgences were never on sale. To this day as she always has, the Church encourages almsgiving and teaches that it gains spiritual benefits for the giver. This is not “selling” anything.Yes it did some good. It got the church to wake up by realizing how corrupt the clergy was. The sale of indulgences stopped - the Council of Trent did a ton of good. But long term, it was a disaster. Didn’t Luther once say that if he had known what would’ve happened he never would’ve broke?
P
Petergee
Guest
No it was not. Abuses are not mentioned in Luther’s “95 theses” or any of his other early writings. It was only years later that Luther began to rant (extremely exaggeratedly) about abuses in the Church to try to rationalise what he had done.My thoughts about this was the Reformation was tragic but necessary. There was widespread abuse within the Church, and it was the correction of the abuses that first spurred Luther to action.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
It is much easier for people to believe in lies than in teh Truth. There you have it. It is an option for the people to chose between lies and the Truth and as always people remain the same. It has been a way to keep test people if they love Truth or lies. IN the last few protestantism has grown therefore keeping more people away from teh Truth.Do you think the Protestant Reformation did anything good? I personally thing it was one of the greatest tragedies in the history of the human race, but could’ve been avoided. And if it were avoided, things would be a lot better off today. Why did it happen, and what could have been done to stop it, and what can be done now to reverse the damages wrought by it?
Waht they call misguided, I call it lies. It good way to keep people from knowing the Truth.
Like the holy father just said in Spain, trying to find Jesus alone is a good way to find a counterfeit Christ.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
I disagree completely. The Church was in full knowlege of these abuses, way, way before the reformation and was in the process of reform. The Church in those days took many decades to make decisions, as often ideas for reform conflicted with various points of view from clergy of the Church. For example, some Italian clergy might be fully seeking reform while clergy in France would be saying the opposite, as they claimed it would cause various problems in their own districts.It made the Church wake up to how widespread the clergy’s abuse was.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
I dislike it when people say ‘It made the Church take a hard look at itself’. I find that would be implying that the Church was doing nothing, was being outright lazy to, or ignored the internal problems it faced. I think it would be more correct to say ‘It changed the Church’s priorities’, from being focused on the threat of invasion and conversion by Ottoman (Islamic) forces in Eastern Europe, to putting more resources and priority on the internal problems it was obviously facing in Western Europe.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
The Council of Trent was well on the way, the Reformation simply changed the Church’s priorities, thus speeding that process.Yes it did some good. It got the church to wake up by realizing how corrupt the clergy was. The sale of indulgences stopped - the Council of Trent did a ton of good. But long term, it was a disaster. Didn’t Luther once say that if he had known what would’ve happened he never would’ve broke?
J
joshrp
Guest
I think after this discussion so far that Luther didn’t care at all about clergy abuse. He was concerned about his own theological doctrines. He wanted to put in place theological doctrines that would excuse him to be able to commit abuses of his own without feeling any contrition or remorse or repentance. That is what I seem to gather now. I thought Luther might have possibly been a decent guy. Really, now I just think he was selfish and dragged a lot of people down into hell. I’m not going to judge where he is now, but he certainly threw a lot of people into Hades with his actions and words.
R
RTully
Guest
You understand the Pope had him excommunicated, had him arrested and at the Diet of Worms verdict had an order anyone could kill him without fear of being punished and forbade anyone to give him food and shelter?. Luther was too busy vilifying the pope as “the anti-Christ” .
R
RTully
Guest
Proof? Or do you speak for God?he certainly threw a lot of people into Hades with his actions and words.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
I’m sorry, but I find this very one-sided and judgemental. It’s impossible to know the situation he was facing, we can only generalise with the information we have of the time. Yes, we know he had theological disputes with the Church, but from his point of view there were abuses which didn’t look like they were going to get fixed. By looking at the evidence of the Church’s intent of reform today, the fact the Church was in the process of reform, we can easily point the finger at Luther for being overly dramatical; but in the mindset of the lower-class in renaissance Europe, the Church would of looked immovable, far away from any type of reform.I think after this discussion so far that Luther didn’t care at all about clergy abuse. He was concerned about his own theological doctrines. He wanted to put in place theological doctrines that would excuse him to be able to commit abuses of his own without feeling any contrition or remorse or repentance. That is what I seem to gather now. I thought Luther might have possibly been a decent guy. Really, now I just think he was selfish and dragged a lot of people down into hell. I’m not going to judge where he is now, but he certainly threw a lot of people into Hades with his actions and words.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
The decree was issued by the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V!You understand the Pope had him excommunicated, had him arrested and at the Diet of Worms verdict had an order anyone could kill him without fear of being punished and forbade anyone to give him food and shelter?
The Pope promised him a safe passage!
R
RTully
Guest
I agree technically the Empire was in charge of the Diet of Worms but it was the influence of the Pope and their insistance Luther changed his 95 Thesies to cut portions out that were the reason he was arrested in the first place. You would agree with that correct?The decree was issued by the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V!
The Pope promised him a safe passage!
Also, my point was I doubt Luther had any reason at that point to trust the Pope at that point to come back.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
Sorry, I couldn’t understand your question.I agree technically the Empire was in charge of the Diet of Worms but it was the influence of the Pope and their insistance Luther changed his 95 Thesies to cut portions out that were the reason he was arrested in the first place. You would agree with that correct?
Also, my point was I doubt Luther had any reason at that point to trust the Pope at that point to come back.
R
RTully
Guest
He was arrested because the Church issued a ban on the 95 Theses which at that point it turned to the Roman authorities which resulted in the Diet of Worms.Sorry, I couldn’t understand your question.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
Therefore we can, without any further citation or delay, proceed against him to his condemnation and damnation as one whose faith is notoriously suspect and in fact a true heretic with the full severity of each and all of the above penalties and censures. Yet, with the advice of our brothers, imitating the mercy of almighty God who does not wish the death of a sinner but rather that he be converted and live, and forgetting all the injuries inflicted on us and the Apostolic See, we have decided to use all the compassion we are capable of. It is our hope, so far as in us lies, that he will experience a change of heart by taking the road of mildness we have proposed, return, and turn away from his errors. We will receive him kindly as the prodigal son returning to the embrace of the Church.
Excerpt from Exsurge Domine - Bull of Pope Leo X issued June 15, 1520Therefore let Martin himself and all those adhering to him, and those who shelter and support him, through the merciful heart of our God and the sprinkling of the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ by which and through whom the redemption of the human race and the upbuilding of holy mother Church was accomplished, know that from our heart we exhort and beseech that he cease to disturb the peace, unity, and truth of the Church for which the Savior prayed so earnestly to the Father. Let him abstain from his pernicious errors that he may come back to us. If they really will obey, and certify to us by legal documents that they have obeyed, they will find in us the affection of a father’s love, the opening of the font of the effects of paternal charity, and opening of the font of mercy and clemency.
P
PiousTemplar
Guest
Excuse me? When was Martin Luther ever arrested? The edict was to proclaim that he is to be arrested, but he never actually was. He was promised safe passage to and from the diet. His arrest was never really enforced as the Emperor was busy with political issues at the time.He was arrested because the Church issued a ban on the 95 Theses which at that point it turned to the Roman authorities which resulted in the Diet of Worms.
R
RTully
Guest
Thanks, that was an interesting read, however this letter is still well before Luther was excommunicated in 1521 and also before the ban of the 95 theses and prior to his arrest.Excerpt from Exsurge Domine - Bull of Pope Leo X issued June 15, 1520
Also, again my main point to the original poster I responded was to basically say that after all that happeded to Luther it shouldn’t be a suprise he did not trust showing up at the Council of Trent.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.