If it wasn't for Martin Luther

  • Thread starter Thread starter adstrinity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is an essential difference between the heresies of history and Protestantism. There were major theological conflicts and disputes throughout Church history. We can assume that all of them were between people who were sincere in their beliefs. The Christological heresies in the early part of Christian history were hotly disputed by the adherents of opposing doctrines. Let’s take the Arian heresy as an example. The dispute was about which belief chould be adopted by the Church. Is Jesus truly God, the Second Person of the Trinity, coeternal and consubstantial with the Father, or is He a created being as angels are created spirits?

The turmoil this created was great, but what the opposing parties were trying to do is get their position adopted by the Church. They did not attampt to go start their own separate organization and call it a church.

So one of the things that is new with Protestantism is the idea that there can be a break away Church, and then from that separated stand alone entity many breakaway independent churches divided from one another. Some say there are 28,000 denominations. I don’t know if that is true, but in my little town of 30,000 or so, there are 125 different disparate groups that call themselves church and have some unique belief or doctrine that makes them different from the others.

In this thing we call Protestantism from its very beginning is doctrinally programmed to split and resplit. The reason is one of its essential beliefs is that all authority is in scripture. That means the Church has none. There is no institution whether it is founded by Christ or not that can interpret scripture. Protestant friends tell me scripture interprets scripture. That is so bizarre I can’t even answer it.

So while there have always been theological disputes over what is doctrinally true or false, until the advent of the phenomenon of Protestantism in history we never saw this constant fracturing. The earlier disputers fought to get the Church to agree with them, and did not start new churches.

There were some small sects that quietly held to their believes, but they eventually died off. Sometimes it took centuries for certain heresies to die, but eventually they all do.
I agree.
 
It is a generalization as I was not writing a book.

I was a Protestant and understand the thought very well. I was very anticatholic for many years.

There have been reformers before and after Luther that worked within the Church. Splitting the Church was not the solution. A response will be it was not his intent. I would disagree to an extent. He went to Rome and knew of the failures of the Papacy. He did nothing and wrote nothing. It wasn’t until he created his knew theology, based out of fear, that he went against Rome. There is nothing romantic about Luther and the Reformation. Romanticising Luther and Calvin does not help this world. Both performed witch hunts. Calvin executed or excommunicated 6 percent of the population of Geneva in 5 years. If Catholics had done this we would have killed tens of millions. Calvin strapped a Bible on the chest of a man and watched him slowly burn to death. He strapped the Bible on the person’s chest because he wanted the person to feel the flames of the fire in his face. Luther believed in sorcery and that he had been hexed. He burned witches at the stake. Approved the killing of 100,000 people. Compare that to the indulgences the Pope was selling to complete the Sistene Chapel. Pretending the the Reformers were pious is a disservice to all. I could go on and on as these were not good people.

As far as who wins, watch the forums. They ignore both Christian and secular history, archealogical finds, exegesis of the Bible, all to follow a man that juxtaposed Roman 1:17 backwards to find a new faith because he feared the Lord so much he was petrified. this is written in his own hand writing.

“They are perhaps more learned about the life of a Christian daily” who says? There are many good Protestant people. Concerning their faith how many Protestants religions believe in self sacrificing love for Christ? Tell me how many Protestant religions profess redemptive suffering? Do you know? The whole point of Protestant Reformation was to leave self sacrificing for the Lord. Read about Luther and Calvin and it is there. It is not a mystery.
No I agree it is not a mystery - except perhaps as you have explicated it. I wonder if you can cite references for the highlighted passages, as this is the first time (as a historian) I have had the advantage of hearing of these monstrous massacres.

Correction: we do not talk about the protestant religion, but about the Christian religion, and Christian denominations including the Catholic, Methodist and Anglican denominations inter alia.

In Christ,
 
No I agree it is not a mystery - except perhaps as you have explicated it. I wonder if you can cite references for the highlighted passages, as this is the first time (as a historian) I have had the advantage of hearing of these monstrous massacres.

Correction: we do not talk about the protestant religion, but about the Christian religion, and Christian denominations including the Catholic, Methodist and Anglican denominations inter alia.

In Christ,
I will find my sources and bring them with me this week. It appears you have not read about Calvin or Luther.

There is one true Church. Catholicism is not a denomination of Christianity. With this said I am not stating there are not good Protestant that may go to heaven. We are not a denomintation by any concept and I do not believe you will find that thought supported by the Catholic Faith.
 
No I agree it is not a mystery - except perhaps as you have explicated it. I wonder if you can cite references for the highlighted passages, as this is the first time (as a historian) I have had the advantage of hearing of these monstrous massacres.

Correction: we do not talk about the protestant religion, but about the Christian religion, and Christian denominations including the Catholic, Methodist and Anglican denominations inter alia.

In Christ,
Calvin was the ayatolah of Geneva. He had people who challenged him burned. It is known history. No one denies it, but many try to down play it. His lifestyle was much more upright than Luther’s, but his doctrine much more pernicious.
 
ralphinal;:
Do you have more information on this?
I thought that either Sakae Ikeda, or Yoshiro Saeki, or Ken Joseph wrote about First Century Christianity in Japan. They only trace it back to the fourth century. 😦

Both Wang Weifan and Gu Wuman write about First Century Christianity in India and China. ( IIRC, they use the term 景教, rather than 基督教 or 天主教. )

The Japanese history depends upon the Chinese history, and a dispute about some islands in the South China Sea.

xan

jonathon
 
I thought that either Sakae Ikeda, or Yoshiro Saeki, or Ken Joseph wrote about First Century Christianity in Japan. They only trace it back to the fourth century. 😦

Both Wang Weifan and Gu Wuman write about First Century Christianity in India and China. ( IIRC, they use the term 景教, rather than 基督教 or 天主教. )

The Japanese history depends upon the Chinese history, and a dispute about some islands in the South China Sea.

xan

jonathon
Thanks. I will see what i can find
 
I will find my sources and bring them with me this week. It appears you have not read about Calvin or Luther.

There is one true Church. Catholicism is not a denomination of Christianity. With this said I am not stating there are not good Protestant that may go to heaven. We are not a denomintation by any concept and I do not believe you will find that thought supported by the Catholic Faith.
Do bring the sources and citations: I specialised in history in one of my career incarnations. Luther and Calvin were on the agenda.

The Catholic church may not support the proposition that it is one Christian denomination among others, but many Christians support that proposition. The Church is not infallible in this regard.

In Christ,
 
Do bring the sources and citations: I specialised in history in one of my career incarnations. Luther and Calvin were on the agenda.
I apologize for the digression. I wanted to reply to the post.

This post is not to lessen Pope Leo’s severe issues. I am just pointing out that the great reformers were no better. I do not believe they should be romanticised. I will follow up with a post about Luther in a bit. I kept the posts mild. With detailed reading some of these episodes are brutal. I am providing a set of authors to show that this is not a limited thought. In addition the books I have read are very critical of the Catholic Church. They are not onesided.

The Reformation Diarmaid MacCulloch – Page 238
“Calvin was as clear as the Roman Catholic inquisition in Lyons or papal Antichrist in Rome that Servetus must die although Calvin would have preferred a more merciful summary method of execution; he did not oppose the burning on Oct 27, 1553… To show mercy would be to show weakness and that would encourage his enemies.”

Page 239 – “Calvin gleefully seized on this attempted coup d etat. Four of his chief opponents were beheaded and their defeat, Calvin’s triumph, was represented as Gods triumph. Over the severed victim’s head was coldly in scribed.
For having fallen into misfortune, of loving man more than God, Claude de Geneva has his head nailed up in this place.” (I did not post the details; however, this act of desecration is much worse than what I have posted)

The Concise History of the Catholic Church Thomas Bokenkotter – Page 229
“Crossing swords with the Pope of Geneva was a dangerous pastime and the vanquished often paid for it dearly. Jacques Gruett…who bitterly resented the life style imposed by Calvin… Gruett was arrested, tortured in the manner of his age, and when evidence was found convicting him of blasphemy beheaded.”

229 “Michael Servetus…at the behest of Calvin was arrested and after trial burned at the stake”

The Life and Times of John Calvin – Paul Henry Emil & Henry Stebbing – Page 224
“Contemplating as we are the execution of Servetus, … whether Calvin ever really thought much about the death of that unhappy man? If he did not absolutely promote it, he certainly considered it just and necessary” (The details of Servetus death are cold. His papers were strapped to his chest when he was burned at the stake as I stated in my previous post.)

Life of John Calvin Thomas Henry Dyer– Page 329
“Calvin’s proceedings were attributed by his opponents to feeling of personal hatred and a desire of shedding their blood…a recent biographer of Calvin has rested one of his main arguments against the truth of this charge on the assertion that such motives were not imputed to Calvin, even by the Libertines themselves. But this author must have overlooked a passage in Calvins own letter, where we find it stated that such an intention had been ascribed to him: nay Calvin was even accused of standing by while prisoners were tortured and he urged the severest measures”

Witchcraft in the Southwest Marc Simmons – Page 8
“Those inquisitions carried out by John Calvin in 1545 resulted in 31 executions for witchcraft in the city of Geneva.”

Witch Hunting in the Southwest – Eric Midelfort Page 73
“Geneva in the years 1542 – 1545 some 40 person were found guilty of witchcraft and executed.”

History of Political Ideas Eric Voegelin, Athanasios Moulakis, David Walsh, David L. Morse – Page 276 “John Calvin committed 58 executions and 76 banishments”

This is about 6 percent of the Geneva population that ranged from 13,000 to 15,000 people.
 
Luther

The Reformation Diarmaid MacCulloch – Page 238
“He grimly and categorically endorsed the revenge meted out by God’s magistrates on Earth…as the Habsburg armies advanced north…he published his tract with a furious appendix, entitled “Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants. The text of Romans 13:1 sounded a tocsin throughout his biting prose and it was given a murderous edge that did not appear in Paul’s original text “Let everyone who can. Smite slay and stab secretly or openly remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful or devilish than a rebel…the mayor of Zwickau…wrote that he could not regard the pamphlet as a theological work, calling as it did “for private and public murder of the peasants. Is the devil and those who do this, to be our Lord God.”

Page 666 – “Luther’s writing of 1543 is a blueprint for the Nazi’s Kristallnacht of 1938. It recommends that in retaliation for Jewish obstinacy, synagogues should be burned, Jewish Literature confiscated, Jewish teaching forbidden, and vengeance taken for the killing of Christ”

The Catholic Church History – Keith D. Lewis Page 87
Against the robbing and murdering hordes of the peasants in which he (Luther) suggested that the peasants be “cut down like dogs” Luther support of the civil authorities to put down religious dissent is something that would become common place”

If I recall correctly 100,000 peasant were killed or executed in these wars.

If anyone wishes I can also post Luther’s speeches supporting the execution of witches.
 
Luther

The Reformation Diarmaid MacCulloch – Page 238
“He grimly and categorically endorsed the revenge meted out by God’s magistrates on Earth…as the Habsburg armies advanced north…he published his tract with a furious appendix, entitled “Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants. The text of Romans 13:1 sounded a tocsin throughout his biting prose and it was given a murderous edge that did not appear in Paul’s original text “Let everyone who can. Smite slay and stab secretly or openly remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful or devilish than a rebel…the mayor of Zwickau…wrote that he could not regard the pamphlet as a theological work, calling as it did “for private and public murder of the peasants. Is the devil and those who do this, to be our Lord God.”

Page 666 – “Luther’s writing of 1543 is a blueprint for the Nazi’s Kristallnacht of 1938. It recommends that in retaliation for Jewish obstinacy, synagogues should be burned, Jewish Literature confiscated, Jewish teaching forbidden, and vengeance taken for the killing of Christ”

The Catholic Church History – Keith D. Lewis Page 87
Against the robbing and murdering hordes of the peasants in which he (Luther) suggested that the peasants be “cut down like dogs” Luther support of the civil authorities to put down religious dissent is something that would become common place”

If I recall correctly 100,000 peasant were killed or executed in these wars.

If anyone wishes I can also post Luther’s speeches supporting the execution of witches.
Thank you for these citations: I shall follow up. I had no idea there was anything approaching a massacre of the level you present here.

I have been looking at death tolls for the Spanish Inquisition which took place about the same time period, and found the following fyi. (There is no mention of Reformation massacres in this comprehensive analysis.)

**Spanish Inquisition (1478-1834) **(Twentieth Century Atlas - Historical Body Count (Matthew White)

Cited in Will Durant, The Reformation (1957):
  • Juan Antonio Llorente, General Secretary of the Inquisition from 1789 to 1801, estimated that 31,912 were executed, 1480-1808.
  • In contrast to the high estimate cited above, Durant tosses his support to the following low estimates
    :
    1. Hernando de Pulgar, secretary to Queen Isabella, estimated 2,000burned before 1490.
    2. An unnamed “Catholic historian” estimated 2,000 burned, 1480-1504, and 2,000 burned, 1504-1758.
    3. PGtH: 8,800 deaths by burning, 1478-1496
    4. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (1910): 8,800 burnt in 18 years of Torquemada. (acc2 Buckle and Friedländer)
    5. Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic: 10,220 burnt in 18 years of Torquemada
    6. Britannica: 2,000
    7. Aletheia, The Rationalist’s Manual: 35,534 burned.
    8. Fox’s Book of Martyrs, Ch.IV: 32,000 burned
    9. Paul Johnson A History of the Jews (1987): 32,000 k. by burning; 20,226 k. before 1540
    10. Wertham: 250,000
    11. Rummel: 350,000 deaths overall.
    12. MEDIAN: 8,800 under Torq.; 32,000 all told.
    13. Punished by all means, not death.
    Fox: 309,000
    P. Johnson: 341,000
    Motley: 114,401

    I am not picking up much on the internet wrt deaths in the renaissance and reformation period, but did find the following on The Skeptical Review Online (Religion’s Death Toll, James A. Haught)
    1. In the 1400s, the Inquisition shifted its focus to witchcraft. Priests tortured untold thousands of women into confessing that they were witches who flew through the sky and engaged in sex with the devil – then they were burned or hanged for their confessions. Witch hysteria raged for three centuries in a dozen nations. Estimates of the number executed vary from 100,000 to 2 million. Whole villages were exterminated. In the first half of the 17th century, about 5,000 “witches” were put to death in the French province of Alsace, and 900 were burned in the Bavarian city of Bamberg. The witch craze was religious madness at its worst.
    2. The “Protestant Inquisition” is a term applied to the severities of John Calvin in Geneva and Queen Elizabeth I in England during the 1500s. Calvin’s followers burned 58 “heretics,” including theologian Michael Servetus, who doubted the Trinity. Elizabeth I outlawed Catholicism and executed about 200 Catholics.
    On www.ignatiusinsight.com, there are short articles on the three principal ‘reformers’ but only bare mention of three or four executions under Calvin.

    absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Huguenot sets out a history of the Huguenot Protestant conflict with French Catholics: the St Bartholomew’s Day Massacre alone is said to have claimed 110,000 Protestant lives, and led directly to the emigration of Huguenots to South Africa, Canada, United States (as they are now named) and elsewhere.

    I do not intend to detract from the information you have produced. It will speak for itself.

    We cannot romanticise any of the inter-Christian persecution of the period of the renaissance and reformation. None of the perpetrators of mass executions, persecutions and pogroms in Europe can be excused in any way.

    The fact is however that this was a period of extreme tension within the Catholic Church which spilled over into generalised tension among Catholics, Protestants and Jews across Europe, with the latter usually at the mucky end of the stick.

    In Christ,
 
Just my :twocents: It all had to happen the way it did. It is God’s plan. It couldn’t of happened any other way. God knew that not every person would conform to his one true church. He knew…a plan.
 
Thank you for these citations: I shall follow up. I had no idea there was anything approaching a massacre of the level you present here.
I have sources that will state that the numbers you are using concerning the Inquistion are old numbers. The death toll for all Inquisition; which, there were three majors one, was around 5,000 people. I have seen some sources claim more deaths than people existed at the time. My understanding is medieval scholars are verifying actual records to get more up to date numbers. This was over hundreds of years. The majority of these were from the Spanish Inquisition. The Spanish Inquisition was really a persecution of the Jewish people by the Spanish monarchy. It was terrible in the sense that the Inquisition could not be used against non-Christians. The Spanish Monarchy would often force convert the Jewish person then accuse them of not believing in Christ torture them and execute them. The Pope did approve the Inquisition; which was wrong. He saw that is was not proper and issued a papal bull against the Inquisition. (The local Catholic Churches were sometimes used; however, they were given direction by the Monarchy) The Spanish Monarchy put pressure on the Pope and he rescinded the Papal Bull. He did this because at the time Islam was threatening all of Christendom and the Pope believed he needed the Spanish Monarchy for protection. (Not a good reason; however, he did it.)

What is interesting is that the Catholic Faith was the first to place limits on torture. (Again this is not good; but, it was an improvement.) Some will argue that Genghis Khan actually put the first limits on torture. During the Spanish Inquisition torture was not to exceed fifteen minutes and could only be performed once. This was obviously abused. The Pope did limit the torture. Again it is not good; but, it was an improvement. Even at 5,000 deaths the Inquisition was terrible and our Church was responsible. One of the many failures people within our Church have committed.

Pope Leo was certainly no saint. I haven’t read much about it; however, my understanding is that he was engaged in a murderous war himself. My understanding was he wasn’t a priest. He was elected because he was part of the very powerful Medici merchant family. The Church during the Reformation certainly had very large issues. I would prefer to think that none of the major actors involved, at least the three major players the Pope, Luther and Calvin, were saints.

The persecutions between Catholics and Protestants after the Reformation are to numerous to count. It was bloody and terrible for both sides. Clearly not right. Much of it was political in nature. Prior to the Reformation the Pope had indirect control of several Monarchies. Once the Refromation happened the Monarchies and people within Monarchies fought for power. Many used faith as an excuse to fight, kill and seize control.

Inquisitions and persecutions have to be segregated in the sense that Inquistions were sanctions by a Papal decree. Jews were often persecuted because of rumors about them killing babies and drinking their blood. The Popes actually issued many Papal Bulls against the persecution of the Jewish people. Catholics at lower levels continued these barbaric acts though.
 
I have sources that will state that the numbers you are using concerning the Inquistion are old numbers. The death toll for all Inquisition; which, there were three majors one, was around 5,000 people. I have seen some sources claim more deaths than people existed at the time. My understanding is medieval scholars are verifying actual records to get more up to date numbers. This was over hundreds of years. The majority of these were from the Spanish Inquisition. The Spanish Inquisition was really a persecution of the Jewish people by the Spanish monarchy. It was terrible in the sense that the Inquisition could not be used against non-Christians. The Spanish Monarchy would often force convert the Jewish person then accuse them of not believing in Christ torture them and execute them. The Pope did approve the Inquisition; which was wrong. He saw that is was not proper and issued a papal bull against the Inquisition. (The local Catholic Churches were sometimes used; however, they were given direction by the Monarchy) The Spanish Monarchy put pressure on the Pope and he rescinded the Papal Bull. He did this because at the time Islam was threatening all of Christendom and the Pope believed he needed the Spanish Monarchy for protection. (Not a good reason; however, he did it.)

What is interesting is that the Catholic Faith was the first to place limits on torture. (Again this is not good; but, it was an improvement.) Some will argue that Genghis Khan actually put the first limits on torture. During the Spanish Inquisition torture was not to exceed fifteen minutes and could only be performed once. This was obviously abused. The Pope did limit the torture. Again it is not good; but, it was an improvement. Even at 5,000 deaths the Inquisition was terrible and our Church was responsible. One of the many failures people within our Church have committed.

Pope Leo was certainly no saint. I haven’t read much about it; however, my understanding is that he was engaged in a murderous war himself. My understanding was he wasn’t a priest. He was elected because he was part of the very powerful Medici merchant family. The Church during the Reformation certainly had very large issues. I would prefer to think that none of the major actors involved, at least the three major players the Pope, Luther and Calvin, were saints.

The persecutions between Catholics and Protestants after the Reformation are to numerous to count. It was bloody and terrible for both sides. Clearly not right. Much of it was political in nature. Prior to the Reformation the Pope had indirect control of several Monarchies. Once the Refromation happened the Monarchies and people within Monarchies fought for power. Many used faith as an excuse to fight, kill and seize control.

Inquisitions and persecutions have to be segregated in the sense that Inquistions were sanctions by a Papal decree. Jews were often persecuted because of rumors about them killing babies and drinking their blood. The Popes actually issued many Papal Bulls against the persecution of the Jewish people. Catholics at lower levels continued these barbaric acts though.
And moving right along we come to Henry VIII and later the rubble of the English/Scottish civil war which decimated communities, buildings, and faiths. (The priest’s hole in many erstwhile Catholic homes still exist.)

In Christ?
 
…Do you think Protestants would have come up with the arguments at a later date? Sola Scriptura and all of its entropic misunderstandings and declaring some of the Bible non-Canonical? It seems to me that Protestants, especially Protestants who don’t believe in anything that was done prior to 200 years ago, dumbly say things that they have heard or read without really thinking about it, dare I say, fully believing it. They just don’t even know what is truth, but, they’ll say, “Show me in the Bible,” and if it is shown, they say you’re not looking at it correctly. Do you think they would be this, oh, let’s say, “intelligent,” if it wasn’t for Martin Luther?

Since they say that all one needs is the Bible to be in communion with God, do you think, without reading what others have wrote, they would have been able to decipher things the way they have? OR, do you think, if they HADN’T read Martin Luther and John Calvin and Henry VIII et al, they would have come up with a much worse/heretical interpretation?

Of course, this IS assuming that anybody would have had the audacity to brake away from Jesus’ Bride in the first place…do you think, if it wasn’t for Martin Luther, anybody would have done so and come up with erroneous doctrine at a later date?
I believe that it would have been only a matter of time before folks began to see the false teachings and parishioner abuse that was gone on wildly in the Roman Catholic church, not to mention the outlandish dogmas and the pure ignoring of Scriptural premise on many of these issues. Martin Luther got an obvious revelation from God to do what he did in the eyes of a horrible death such as the ones who died several years later in England at the hands of bloody Mary.
 
… Martin Luther got an obvious revelation from God…
I don’t think the revelation was that obvious.
… to do what he did in the eyes of a horrible death such as the ones who died several years later in England at the hands of bloody Mary.
What does “bloody Mary” mean?
 
I don’t think the revelation was that obvious.

What does “bloody Mary” mean?
This is a reference to the Catholic Mary who was much maligned…
It’s a rather long and sad story. She gave mercy to her sister, who in turn, gave no mercy to her…

Very sad indeed.

But, even Mary here we speak of- I do not believe she would hate her sister for it. Elizabeth was a person that had some hard choices to make also…

Its so easy for us to imagine who was right and wrong then.

Its not that simple really.
 
I believe that it would have been only a matter of time before folks began to see the false teachings and parishioner abuse that was gone on wildly in the Roman Catholic church, not to mention the outlandish dogmas and the pure ignoring of Scriptural premise on many of these issues. Martin Luther got an obvious revelation from God to do what he did in the eyes of a horrible death such as the ones who died several years later in England at the hands of bloody Mary.
=Gross HYPERBOLE!

I’m not even going to comment beyond this: You are obviously grossly ignorant of history, especially in that period in time.
 
=Gross HYPERBOLE!

I’m not even going to comment beyond this: You are obviously grossly ignorant of history, especially in that period in time.
Hey Rob!

I missed ya!🙂

Was I too far off in my estimation of the “sisters” we speak of here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top