T
tqualey
Guest
Glad you asked, Pat De! 
Oh, I deleted your first paragraphā¦it was getting a bit repititous (asking the same questions over and over) when your objections have been previously answered. But, you have asked a new question that really deserves an answer - and, I will really try to give it my best.
So, why did Luther and his fellow āreformersā have a shattering impact? Well, there is no one single answer from a human perspective. I would say that there were at least three main reasons why events went they way that they did:
**1.) Economic **- at this time in the Renaissance, St Peterās Cathedral was being built and decorated at the time and money (that would other-wise have stayed in Europe and England was going to Italy. The consification of Church lands and property was another economic consideration. These lands were not only tax free, but the working of these lands generated significant revenue (that was also untaxed) for th Church. There were economic winners and losers with this change - and, most people do not want to lose - or, at least lose for any longer than is necessary.
** 2. Religious **- the sale of indulgences and those members of the Church who had vowed chastity and/or celebicy but were living in open concubinage and occupied with the children they had fathered are two examples where Catholic clergy had fallen very short of the Chruchās teaching. Keeping oneās passions under control is not a new problem for the Church! Luther was correct to decry such abuse. Had he stopped there, he might have been considered as āSt. Martin Lutherā in the same context as St. Catherine of Seina (here is a link you may enjoy reading about this very early Church Reformer: newadvent.org/cathen/03447a.htm )
** 3.) Political **- the conquest of Church lands offered political control in addition to an economic benefit. Englandās King Henry VIII used confiscated Church land to reward his friends at no cost to himself. (He also rewarded his friends and supporters) with the confiscated property of individual Catholics. These new lands and their new owners were politically aligned to the Crown. Confiscating property in Germany was more on a local basis with individual nobels providing this benefit to themselves as opposed to a single ruler. (This lack of unity [contrasted with Englandās strong King] set the stage for the Thirty Yearsā War. Here is a link you may enjoy: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War) Other European countries saw what was going on with the land grab and followed suit.
The order of these three considerations are presented in the way they came to my mind and not necessarily reflective of any particular order of importance. The issue here is that there are real world considerations that can not be ignored if one is really interested in finding answers.
Where things get complicated is that you have all of these protestants who canāt agree with one another at the beginning of their break with Rome. Today, with >33,000 different religions claiming to be protestant and - all claiming to be ātrueā yet all built on men and human tradition - is it any wonder that not only is there no unity, but there is no agreement on the essentials of what it means to be a protestant. (Baptism is requried - no, it is an ordinance or even an option, confess your sins to God - not necessary, just be sorry, Holy Eucharist, while required surely not the Body of Christ - only a rememberance or no required and has been abolished, homosexuality is against Godās Law or no, just a private life style issue, etc.) The list of internal differences is significant and with all of the ego lead groups out there - none will submit their traditions of men for someone elseās tradition of men! So the basis of protestanism is an on-gong series of fragmentations, and chaos.
God bless
Oh, I deleted your first paragraphā¦it was getting a bit repititous (asking the same questions over and over) when your objections have been previously answered. But, you have asked a new question that really deserves an answer - and, I will really try to give it my best.
I guess I did not understand your response on Lutherās holding to her immaculate conception and perpetual virginity. Does this mean you agree with Luther on these points or disagree? Now, on to your questionā¦
So, why did Luther and his fellow āreformersā have a shattering impact? Well, there is no one single answer from a human perspective. I would say that there were at least three main reasons why events went they way that they did:
**1.) Economic **- at this time in the Renaissance, St Peterās Cathedral was being built and decorated at the time and money (that would other-wise have stayed in Europe and England was going to Italy. The consification of Church lands and property was another economic consideration. These lands were not only tax free, but the working of these lands generated significant revenue (that was also untaxed) for th Church. There were economic winners and losers with this change - and, most people do not want to lose - or, at least lose for any longer than is necessary.
** 2. Religious **- the sale of indulgences and those members of the Church who had vowed chastity and/or celebicy but were living in open concubinage and occupied with the children they had fathered are two examples where Catholic clergy had fallen very short of the Chruchās teaching. Keeping oneās passions under control is not a new problem for the Church! Luther was correct to decry such abuse. Had he stopped there, he might have been considered as āSt. Martin Lutherā in the same context as St. Catherine of Seina (here is a link you may enjoy reading about this very early Church Reformer: newadvent.org/cathen/03447a.htm )
** 3.) Political **- the conquest of Church lands offered political control in addition to an economic benefit. Englandās King Henry VIII used confiscated Church land to reward his friends at no cost to himself. (He also rewarded his friends and supporters) with the confiscated property of individual Catholics. These new lands and their new owners were politically aligned to the Crown. Confiscating property in Germany was more on a local basis with individual nobels providing this benefit to themselves as opposed to a single ruler. (This lack of unity [contrasted with Englandās strong King] set the stage for the Thirty Yearsā War. Here is a link you may enjoy: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War) Other European countries saw what was going on with the land grab and followed suit.
The order of these three considerations are presented in the way they came to my mind and not necessarily reflective of any particular order of importance. The issue here is that there are real world considerations that can not be ignored if one is really interested in finding answers.
Where things get complicated is that you have all of these protestants who canāt agree with one another at the beginning of their break with Rome. Today, with >33,000 different religions claiming to be protestant and - all claiming to be ātrueā yet all built on men and human tradition - is it any wonder that not only is there no unity, but there is no agreement on the essentials of what it means to be a protestant. (Baptism is requried - no, it is an ordinance or even an option, confess your sins to God - not necessary, just be sorry, Holy Eucharist, while required surely not the Body of Christ - only a rememberance or no required and has been abolished, homosexuality is against Godās Law or no, just a private life style issue, etc.) The list of internal differences is significant and with all of the ego lead groups out there - none will submit their traditions of men for someone elseās tradition of men! So the basis of protestanism is an on-gong series of fragmentations, and chaos.
God bless
Go to any of the Catholic sites you have been given, identify what has been said and then scripturally refute it with something more then, āI donāt believeā. Yeah, I knowā¦ this would be a tough task if you actually tried to do it. So, whatās it going to be: continue playing games or really do something of significance? 