Luther, the movie

[Psalm45_9]

How did everyone feel about this movie? I thought it wasn’t too anti-Catholic, but it could be at times. The Iconclasim scene pissed me right off, other then that I wasn’t too offended. At times I felt they distorted Catholic Teachings, like Salvation outside of the church and indulgences. They did not try to explain what an idulgence or purgatory is, except both are wrong. They also made it look like Luther’s Bible was the first Bible ever translated into German, that’s a compleate lie, there were Bibles translated into German and English long before there was Luther’s Bible.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

This movie was one of the ones discussed last night (December 13) on Catholic Answers Live. It was in the last half of the broadcast and I culd not hear it too well since the signal is weak after sunset.

PF

 

[mean_owen]

As someone who doesn’t really have a dog in the race, I’d say that, as far as movies about historical figures go, it wasn’t too bad. I don’t know the theological views, if any, of the screenplay writers/producers etc., but it’s not surprising that a movie about Luther would not deal too sympathetically with indulgences, at least those offered by Tetzel.

All in all, the movie was rather sympathetic toward Luther, but then again, it dealt with his earlier years, where he was a somewhat more sympathetic character (compared to his later years). I’m sure that if the movie had been put out by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith it would have had a different flavor.

 

[Steven_Merten]

I asked my wife if she wanted to watch the Luther movie with me. She said she was not interested and was just going to read a book. A third of the way through the movie I stopped it to get up to get some popcorn. My wife said, “What are you doing! Turn that back on!” Needless to say we were very impressed with the movie.

We could not believe that it was put out by the Lutheran Church. Luther was displayed as such a goofball at times. My wife and I spent some time discussing the movie. We are devout, cradle to grave, Catholics who go to Mass every Sunday. Yet we believe that the movie was a very close description of the situation of the times and the corruption in the Church at the time.

One big question though; has the Catholic Church made any official post-Luther changes or safeguards to protect people who want to file a complaint about papal or upper Church leadership abuses or evil activities? I have always heard, from Catholics, and believed that Luther should have complained about Church leadership abuses; however he should not have schismed. The movie indicated that Luther tried to voice his objections, of some legitimate grievances, to upper Church leadership but they simply tried to smash his voice using their authority rather than listen to anything he had to say. The movie indicated that the Pope would have had him put to death as a heretic had he gone to Rome, without listening to anything he had to say. If this is true, then how could he have voiced his legitimate objections while remaining in the Church alive?

Today, many of the Catholic leaders I have heard or read agree with some, not all, of the objections Luther had against upper Church leader actions. No more indulgences is one proof of this. Most Catholic leaders agree that there have been evil Popes. Are there any post-Luther freedom of speech, whistle blower protection, now written into Church doctrine to protect those who wish to speak out against what they see as evil papal or upper Church leadership actions?

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[BillyHW]

Steven, we still have indulgences.

Anyways, I recently rented the movie and didn’t think very much of it.

It has almost the complete litany of Protestant myths and stereotypes.

All the Protestants are noble and beautiful and wise.

All the Catholics are ugly and corrupt and and stupid and have scowls on thir faces the whole time.

It’s not a very well done movie either. The plot is lacking, the acting unispired.

 

[Psalm45_9]

Yes, the Catholic Church still practices Indulgences today. One thing, indulgences were never for sale. It was customary for the penitent to give the church a donation after the granted an indulgence, but it was never mandatory. However, during Luther’s time, it was almost unthinkable for someone to not donate money to the Church for an indulgence. John Tetzel was in essence selling indulgences, he used very persuasive and often agressive marketing strategies in order to have people give donations, to the naked eye he was selling the indulgences, and it was an abuse. Making money is not what indulgences are about. Indulgences are not for sale, and they still are not for sale today.

Here are some links about indulgences: catholic.com/library/Primer_on_Indulgences.asp

catholic.com/library/Myths_About_Indulgences.asp

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence