Was the Reformation demonic?

[Thorolfr]

Does the Catholic Church still sell indulgences?

Myths about Indulgences

If people like Luther hadn’t made a fuss about what Johann Tetzel and others were doing, I doubt that Tetzel would have been disowned by the Church. His methods of selling indulgences were spelled out in a sales manual issued under the authority of Albrecht of Brandenburg, Archbishop of Magdeburg. Also, Tetzel got friends of his in Rome to secure a doctorate in theology for him so that he could place himself on an equal footing with Luther who had a doctorate. And being a Dominican, Tetzel was supported by many fellow Dominicans such as Commissioner of the Sacred Palace, Sylvester Prietias, who produced an indictment of Luther entitle, Against the Presumptuous Theses of Martin Luther concerning the Power of the Pope. He pushed the Pope to commence legal proceeding against Luther.

 

[cena]

If people like Luther hadn’t made a fuss about what Johann Tetzel and others were doing, I doubt that Tetzel would have been disowned by the Church. His methods of selling indulgences were spelled out in a sales manual issued under the authority of Albrecht of Brandenburg, Archbishop of Magdeburg. Also, Tetzel got friends of his in Rome to secure a doctorate in theology for him so that he could place himself on an equal footing with Luther who had a doctorate. And being a Dominican, Tetzel was supported by many fellow Dominicans such as Commissioner of the Sacred Palace, Sylvester Prietias, who produced an indictment of Luther entitle, Against the Presumptuous Theses of Martin Luther concerning the Power of the Pope and pushed to Pope to commence legal proceeding against Luther.

The pope has authority. Luther was going farther than saying he was abusing it

 

[Thorolfr]

The pope has authority. Luther was going farther than saying he was abusing it

If he hadn’t had the protection of Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, Luther would probably have been burnt at the stake.

 

[Elizium23]

…stuff about Tetzel…

Sources? Start giving us book titles or URL links or I’ll start disbelieving you and chalking it up to Protestant propaganda.

 

[Thorolfr]

Sources? Start giving us book titles or URL links or I’ll start disbelieving you and chalking it up to Protestant propaganda.

Most of what I know about Luther and the Reformation comes from the book by English historian Derek Wilson, Out Of The Storm: The Life and Legacy of Martin Luther (Pimlico, 2008) and from the book by Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church at Oxford University, The Reformation: A History (Penguin, 2003)

amazon.com/Out-Storm-Legacy-Martin-Luther-ebook/dp/B00FO9GBB4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1419023751&sr=8-1&keywords=Out+Of+The+Storm%3A+The+Life+and+Legacy+of+Martin+Luther

amazon.com/Reformation-Diarmaid-MacCulloch/dp/014303538X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1419023815&sr=8-1&keywords=reformation+diarmaid

 

[Nelka]

Satan definitely had a hand in it.

 

[JSSD]

“Helping” according to who? You?

According to anyone. Have you converted any protestants?

Is it absurd to ask or answer questions about the Catholic Church as being the “whore of Babylon” or the many other “evil” acts they supposedly commit?

You need to understand that my question is a legitimate one, and is wasn’t asked just because Catholics get pressed on the same issue. I only brought that point up because you write as if Protestant history is off limits compared to Catholic history. If something like Catholic doctrine that existed for centuries is usurped, the question of whether demonic activity has occurred is an important one.

Do I? Or do I merely suggest you’ll catch more flies with honey than vinegar? If you are going to insinuate “demonic” or “satan’s hand” in something, it probably shouldn’t be something where the Catholic church didn’t soon after come back around, acknowledge several points, and say (essentially), “Well, there may be a point to some of this, let us change…” That’s just my own take. The division is sad and unfortunate, but why not look to unify instead of driving the wedge further?

 

[Jubilarian]

According to anyone. Have you converted any protestants?

Do I? Or do I merely suggest you’ll catch more flies with honey than vinegar? If you are going to insinuate “demonic” or “satan’s hand” in something, it probably shouldn’t be something where the Catholic church didn’t soon after come back around, acknowledge several points, and say (essentially), “Well, there may be a point to some of this, let us change…” That’s just my own take. The division is sad and unfortunate, but why not look to unify instead of driving the wedge further?

At the risk of sounding sarcastic, what divine happening occurred that enabled you to pronounce the words “according to anyone?” My question was not necessarily designed to convert Protestants, nor are many questions asked on CAF. I asked a relevant question. If truth is departed from, is Satan always involved. As you can see, the answers have been mixed, with many people such as yourself acting as if these same questions have never been asked of the CC.

You also interpreted my question as “creating a wedge”. That is unfortunate for you. Without such questions, the CC could never have defended itself. Protestants are afforded the same opportunity.

 

[JSSD]

At the risk of sounding sarcastic, what divine happening occurred that enabled you to pronounce the words “according to anyone?”

At the same risk, what divine enabling is necessary? By “according to anyone” I’m giving you free reign. This is just my impression of the question you ask, so by that it isn’t worth the paper you could print it on, but - it has a simultaneous feel of being deeply slighted or insulted and wanting to counter-attack, but without a lot of productivity to it. That is just my opinion, but since you asked and without knowing the intent, it just made me wonder if it helped either 1) convert anyone 2) convince anyone 3) feel as though you defended your honor or 4) made you feel better about the perceived slight you feel.

My question was not necessarily designed to convert Protestants, nor are many questions asked on CAF. I asked a relevant question. If truth is departed from, is Satan always involved. As you can see, the answers have been mixed, with many people such as yourself acting as if these same questions have never been asked of the CC.

I apologize if you feel as though I’m acting that way. This one had a particular biting tone that I don’t think “many questions asked on CAF” do. As I said, upon reading the whole of your question and responses, my impression was that you’ve felt somehow persecuted by protestants (something I feel is moderately common here on CAF) and it had a bit of a retaliatory feel. If that was not your intent, my sincerest apologies.

You also interpreted my question as “creating a wedge”. That is unfortunate for you. Without such questions, the CC could never have defended itself. Protestants are afforded the same opportunity.

Defense by offense? I’m not sure if it is unfortunate for me. I don’t particularly feel anything at all towards it and see both sides. It might be unfortunate to any relationships you wish to cultivate with protestants though.

 

[Jubilarian]

At the same risk, what divine enabling is necessary? By “according to anyone” I’m giving you free reign. This is just my impression of the question you ask, so by that it isn’t worth the paper you could print it on, but - it has a simultaneous feel of being deeply slighted or insulted and wanting to counter-attack, but without a lot of productivity to it. That is just my opinion, but since you asked and without knowing the intent, it just made me wonder if it helped either 1) convert anyone 2) convince anyone 3) feel as though you defended your honor or 4) made you feel better about the perceived slight you feel.

I apologize if you feel as though I’m acting that way. This one had a particular biting tone that I don’t think “many questions asked on CAF” do. As I said, upon reading the whole of your question and responses, my impression was that you’ve felt somehow persecuted by protestants (something I feel is moderately common here on CAF) and it had a bit of a retaliatory feel. If that was not your intent, my sincerest apologies.

Defense by offense? I’m not sure if it is unfortunate for me. I don’t particularly feel anything at all towards it and see both sides. It might be unfortunate to any relationships you wish to cultivate with protestants though.

You seem perplexed at even the nature of CAF. We are all asking questions and some do not equal a conversion experience or a complete agreement. You keep assuming I feel slighted . For the umpteenth time, I did not ask the question because Catholics get asked questions about there “demonic” history, I brought it up because individuals like yourself seem to think the question is “biting”. It is not .

The persecution trip that you are on about me is foolish. If anything , it sounds as though you are quite thin skinned and feel any mention of the Protestant Reformation and possible demonic activity is ‘never to be asked’. Why not try to actually answer the question instead of creating a taboo bogeyman.

 

[JSSD]

You seem perplexed at even the nature of CAF. We are all asking questions and some do not equal a conversion experience or a complete agreement. You keep assuming I feel slighted . For the umpteenth time, I did not ask the question because Catholics get asked questions about there “demonic” history, I brought it up because individuals like yourself seem to think the question is “biting”. It is not .

The persecution trip that you are on about me is foolish. If anything , it sounds as though you are quite thin skinned and feel any mention of the Protestant Reformation and possible demonic activity is ‘never to be asked’. Why not try to actually answer the question instead of creating a taboo bogeyman.

Yes, it is all a total mystery to me and how would I have ever gotten the impression that you tired of being attacked and so lashed out in an identical way back?

You are quite a sensitive individual. It is “unfortunate” that deeply probing questions offend you. Yes we can go back in time an analyze things, its done all the time. I suspect many Catholics during the reformation were not looking at the acts occurring before them as “of God”, but I’m not enough of a historian to know.

I was aware of how the question may appear to Protestants, but it is not much different then then questions asked of Catholics by Protestants. The frequent implications by many Protestant denominations that the Catholic Church is the “whore of Babylon” is quite distressing but we should not run from addressing it.

My question may appearing offensive to you because it is rarely or ever asked, whereas such questions about the Catholic Church and the devil are.

I have found repeated questions that the Catholic Church is under the influence of the devil offensive. In fact such implications have occurred for ages. Here in NY, certain Protestant radio stations paint the church in a demonic way.

I simply asked a question about Protestantism that has been asked in a similar way of the Catholic Church. Maybe you could tell Protestants that rail against Catholicism to “live as Christ did”. Yes my question is a tough one, but I’ve been answering the same claim by Protestants for quite some time.

Your question is just fine, and there are plenty of really good reformation questions here. The tone you’ve added with background context has given it slightly a juvenile flavor, IMHO. And sincerely, don’t worry about offending me with it.

 

[Jubilarian]

Yes, it is all a total mystery to me and how would I have ever gotten the impression that you tired of being attacked and so lashed out in an identical way back?

Your question is just fine, and there are plenty of really good reformation questions here. The tone you’ve added with background context has given it slightly a juvenile flavor, IMHO. And sincerely, don’t worry about offending me with it.

I could possibly have learned from you. Unfortunately , I don’t see any growth on your part. You are quite capable of using insults in a reciprocal manner , possibly because you were referred to as thin skinned. But, we all have shortcomings. I must thank you for recognizing the enormous importance of my questions however.

 

[JSSD]

Um, ok. You asked, I just gave a personal opinion based on my experience with protestants which is within the spectrum of other opinions you received. You are completely free and clear to judge the merit of that opinion and even judge the depth of my dermis if you so desire.

I apologize for not living up my own growth obligation of your question nor recognizing “enormous importance” when I see it. Thank you for pointing out my shortcomings. I guess. (?)

 

[Jubilarian]

Um, ok. You asked, I just gave a personal opinion based on my experience with protestants which is within the spectrum of other opinions you received. You are completely free and clear to judge the merit of that opinion and even judge the depth of my dermis if you so desire.

I apologize for not living up my own growth obligation of your question nor recognizing “enormous importance” when I see it. Thank you for pointing out my shortcomings. I guess. (?)

Your confusion has been noted and unsurprisingly remains. Correct.

 

[JSSD]

Sincerely, good luck with your knowledge quest of enormous importance. http://1389blog.com/pix/HatTipSmileyAnim.gif Truly, have a blessed Christmas.

 

[Jubilarian]

Sincerely, good luck with your knowledge quest of enormous importance. http://1389blog.com/pix/HatTipSmileyAnim.gif Truly, have a blessed Christmas.

Ah yes, the desperate last reply filled with zero “sincerity”. Stay confused…but “truly”, have a very Merry Christmas.

Transparency will get you every time.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

In order to best answer the thread’s question, I think our first resort needs to be to history: we need to discover / reacquaint ourselves with the historical context in which the reformation occurred.

I would suggest that of the things to look into, the first would be the development of the liturgical life of the church from the late fourth trough the early sixteenth centuries, paying close attention to four events in particular: a) the proclamation from Theodosius I making Christianity the state religion in the late fourth century and its impact on the catechetical life of the church; b) the Carolingian / Ottonian reforms in the eighth and ninth centuries; c) the reforms of Gregory VII in the eleventh century and their various repercussions; d) the development of the Gothic style under Abbot Suger at St. Denis in the eleventh/twelfth centuries (noting, particularly, St. Bernard’s ambivalence towards Suger’s project). Looking into these events and their consequences, it will be seen that the development of the Eucharist as a thing to be seen, but not actually received, was a a significant development which shaped the reformers’ views in various ways and against which the reformers strenuously fought . Also seen will be the degree to which the social and the liturgical were closely interwoven: change the one, you change the other.

The second place to look would be how the Avignon Papacy and the string of anti-popes from the fourteenth to the fifteenth centuries divided Christendom and conditioned the view of generations of Christians regarding the hierarchy of the Church. All of this occurred a mere 100 years before the reformation and its shock-waves were still being felt.

The third place to look would be the rising influence of the middle / merchant classes in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries which altered the social landscape of the middle ages (remember: change the social, you change the liturgical and vice versa).

The fourth place to look would be the relationship between the various political powers of Europe and the power of Rome, paying attention to the development of national identities and whatever friction may occur when the Vatican asserts a claim to secular power that may infringe upon a prince’s understanding of their own power or national interests.

The fifth place to look would be the development of the Liturgical Movement from its beginning in the nineteenth century with Dom Prosper Gueranger at Solesmes through Mediator Dei in the 1940’s and culminating in the reforms of Vatican II. How do these reforms compare to the larger Protestant reform project ? Keep in mind that Luther’s points of greatest contention were: transubstantiation as the mandated way of defining or comprehending the incomprehensible mystery of the real presence in the Eucharist; infrequent communion and that only in one kind; lack of vernacular; the understanding of the Eucharist as an actual sacrifice (which understanding was due, in large part, to the popular allegorical interpretations of the Mass by Amalarius of Metz in the eighth/ninth centuries); that the dominical sacraments were numbered at seven and not two or three. Keep in mind, too, that whatever sola scriptura may be, it is not a doctrine but a hermeneutic. My feeling? If the liturgical reforms of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries had occurred in the sixteenth, it is unlikely that Protestantism would have developed in any significant way, or if it did, it would have been as a movement within the Church.

Anyway, once you’ve investigated these five places (at least!) then you may find yourself equipped to pronounce on the virtue (or lack thereof) of the reformation. Personally? I think it was necessary…but it was botched on all sides. It could have been accomplished without schism, but the personalities involved made schism more or less inevitable. Whether or not the devil was involved, I think it is a mistake to refer human faults and failings to the devil. It obscures human (qua human) agency while over-stating and over-inflating the power of the Demon.

My two cents, for what they’re worth.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[JSSD]

Ah yes, the desperate last reply filled with zero “sincerity”. Stay confused…but “truly”, have a very Merry Christmas.

Transparency will get you every time.

Jubilarian,

Sir, you don’t know me or my intentions at all. You mention I am confused, but what is clear is that in the past 11 days alone you have started One, Two, and Three threads which are basically “Raar, Protestantism!” threads.

You are correct in that I simply don’t understand your quest, nor do I share in having this problem with our Christian Brothers outside the Catholic Church, but it is CLEARLY (or transparently, if you will) eating at you. And so I do SINCERELY wish that you find some peace around it. And I do sincerely wish you (all) to have a Merry Christmas. Take it for what it is worth.

 

[JSSD]

Anyway, once you’ve investigated these five places (at least!) then you may find yourself equipped to pronounce on the virtue (or lack thereof) of the reformation. Personally? I think it was necessary…but it was botched on all sides. It could have been accomplished without schism, but the personalities involved made schism more or less inevitable. Whether or not the devil was involved, I think it is a mistake to refer human faults and failings to the devil. It obscures human (qua human) agency while over-stating and over-inflating the power of the Demon.

Excellent post. The bolded part said what I would have liked to in a much better way. “Demonic” is awfully strong suggestion. Strong enough to me to be laughable, if it were not so serious as an accusation.

I’m not willing to pronounce Martin Luther, for example, as bad or good as an absolute. He was a person who did both bad and good things. Just like most everyone that has ever lived.

 

[Jubilarian]

Jubilarian,

Sir, you don’t know me or my intentions at all. You mention I am confused, but what is clear is that in the past 11 days alone you have started One, Two, and Three threads which are basically “Raar, Protestantism!” threads.

You are correct in that I simply don’t understand your quest, nor do I share in having this problem with our Christian Brothers outside the Catholic Church, but it is CLEARLY (or transparently, if you will) eating at you. And so I do SINCERELY wish that you find some peace around it. And I do sincerely wish you (all) to have a Merry Christmas. Take it for what it is worth.

I clearly know your intentions when you wish me a Merry Christmas while mocking my words from a previous posting. Yes, you were sarcastically sincere. Drop the false righteous anger. What was eating at you is that you couldn’t handle my response and quickly dove into desperate mode with an attempt at giving me a farewell kick in the pants.

Don’t even try the, “I was just wishing you a Merry Christmas” game with me, I’m too old for childish tricks.
Moreover, your quandary with Protestant questioning is bizarre . Why Catholics can be riddled with questions from the sublime to the ridiculous and Protestants can not only you know for sure I suppose. Who made you judge and jury about what threads I create? You should be rejoicing that such questions are asked.

You sure have invested a good deal of time examining my threads though, and you. appear more interested in them then you lead on.