Hi Tina…
I am reading Church history very slowly…and the time before the Reformation was highly complex, and the authority of the papacy less defined, and alot of weight placed on bishop councils. Plus communications in those days was poor, or the advisor transmitting would put in his bias or prejudice making the situation worse as what happened in communications between Rome and the Eastern Church, as well as the communications going on between Martin Luther and papal offices.
You have to understand what Christian societies were enduring, the barbarian invasions, plagues, dealing with heresies, schisms regarding who was the right pope…the church evolved with the culture of peoples. New nations were developed and defined…there was a time that it worked out temporal parties would place members of their families into the religious life to represent their way of life. Today we have our local bishop representing us, our way of life and needs, to Rome…
There was a period whether or not people want temporal rulers to dictate God to them or the Church. Between Pope Boniface up to Pope Innocent III marks the time the Church re-asserted herself as the one to represent faith to societies…as they were basically Christian, it was then the Church who set in order society to orientate all life in proper faith back to God.
So when the papacy declared itself supreme…it was referring to proclaiming the will of God to people not power politics. In that same time, there were powerful families that continued to place their clerics in key position. But in past times, the Church lay down the foundation of our hospitals and hospice, universities, law, and the arts that we draw on even today. It is argued that the Catholic Church in essence was the center point for Western civilization.
The Council of Florence was formed in the face of schism, heresies, and it excommunicated the Swiss bishops of Basel. It attempted to settle the schism with the eastern church; there were misrepresentation by papal and orthodox advisors. It also appears that Germany and the Scandinavian countries were seeking their own regional jurisdiction, independent of the Church at the same time Luther was wanting reform of abuses.
It was Luther who declared the pope the anti-Christ, and the one in power at that time was among the worst in our history. But his declaration maligned prior and future popes who were holy and sincere. Luther, extremely penitential himself to the point of scruples, also disregarded the fact regarding indulgences, that they structured by the Church as penances and means for one to detach one’s self from the world and become more godly. He further stated that the Apostles did not have succession of faith from them…this integrity secured by the Holy Spirit that Sacred Scripture is considered from its whole, all parts connected to each other reflecting believers’ history of salvation…we do not look at Scripture as separated pieces alone.
The issue at the Council of Florence was political, and the same with the focus and solution, so it could not stop what was already in process-- areas of people wishing to be more exclusive to their own. The other issue was that the times and needs of given cultures had changed, and the papacy itself needed more reform and adaption. The process failed because it was political but not spiritual.
And Luther’s power of pen would equal any propagandist, rising up even more emnity between Rome and the German people. From there, we had more new teachers and new denominations, and this has continued on.
When Christians turned to military forces and began killing each other, then the break was permanent. The Council of Trent brought the reformed needed for the papacy, practices leading to corruption were stopped, – I think it was one particular priest who was selling indulgences and in a most crass way that set people off. Likewise, the Church made itself like a fortress against apostasy, heresy. In time, it led to clericalism…and Vatican II worked to bring about a more pastoral church, working on restoring past disunity.
