Who is Martin Luther and why was he excommunicated?

[Topper17]

James,

There is information about pertaining to executions in Saxony in the 1530’s. It’s fairly easy to document that the magisterial Reformers advocated a state / church relationship in which heresy and those causing societal unrest would face extreme punishment, including the death penalty. It’s also easy to document the persecution of these people in Protestant lands, including Lutheran lands. I’ve yet to find though any documentation for Luther’s role in public executions in Wittenberg in the 1530’s, or any actual public executions in Wittenberg in the 1530’s.

You said “Wittenberg” specifically and 1530 specifically, and that Luther was in “reign” there specifically hence over-seeing these executions in a role of power. That is a specific place, a specific time, and a specific role.

If you want to change it now to Saxony, simply admit you were in error previously. That would be a good start for you.

First of all, I have no problem stating that I could have been wrong about remembering that the executions that I remembered reading about that took place in Wittenberg. It might have been Saxony and I remembered it incorrectly. After all, I admitted that I couldn’t find the quote I remembered (and I usually can BTW). That being said, it seems rather odd to me that you want me to admit that I was in error when that has not yet been demonstrated. I might still find that quote you know.

Given that you have stated that what ‘interests you is the factual information on the Reformation’, I would think that you would have been a little more forthcoming in regards to my request.

As in all of these kinds of situations, the real truth lies in the details and it is the details of those executions that interests me. When you asked me for the details, you obviously didn’t have any, otherwise you wouldn’t have asked.

So, again, I ask:

Since you asked me for clarification in post number 347, have you come across any specifics on those executions in Saxony? I would be happy to do a search and report back here with whatever I learn. Given your obvious interest in the matter, how about you? Are you willing to do the same?

BTW, what would be a ‘good start for you’ would be to answer this simple direct question.

Topper

 

[Topper17]

Guano,

I see that you have rejected my challenge to put out your points and allow the reader to draw a conclusion. You just can’t resist drawing the conclusion for your reader, can you?

I am almost certain that I do not understand your ‘challenge’ that I refrain from posting my opinions, especially given that these forums are designed to allow people to freely express their opinions. On the face of it, your ‘challenge’ is extremely odd, (to say the very least).

You insult me in virtually every post to me and then in the ONE in which you don’t, you ‘challenge’ me to not post my opinions? And then when I don’t just immediately ‘snap to’, you get angry? What’s up with that (whole thing)?

Actually I have NOT rejected your proposal as you would know if you had read my response to your ‘challenge’. I am still willing to consider this ‘challenge’ but would like to have you explain it a little bit better to me. So I will repost my response so that you can provide the rational as to the details.

guano,

This is an interesting proposal, one that certainly marks a huge change in your demeanor towards me. Now, I’m not saying that I am suspicious but it appears that you might have decided the more I am insulted, slandered, and falsely accused, the more strident my posts become. In other words, that all of those posts about me have exactly the opposite of their intended effect. Nothing else would account for your seemingly conciliatory tone.

Your proposal seems to presume that I should not make public my opinions on this thread, which by the way is a thread about Martin Luther and why he was excommunicated (not a thread about me). Why is it, specifically and exactly, that I should refrain from posting my opinions about Martin Luther (the subject of the thread, when SO MANY people (including you BTW) find it within their purview to post their opinions about me (who is NOT the subject of the thread)?

Do you remember what happened when Militz asked Luther to stop writing? Luther agreed as long as nobody wrote against him. Right? You know what happened then, right? In other words Militz couldn’t control everyone and the agreement collapsed. You know of course who couldn’t restrain himself right (besides Luther of course)?

Actually your proposal is worth considering though, although I wonder if it is practical. If I were agree to this proposal, then what is it that you offer in consideration? Where is the quid pro quo? Are you suggesting that ALL of us refrain from revealing our opinions here, or just me?

Given that you have written an astonishing 26,000 posts on CA in 8 years, and you have probably read another 250,000 posts I have another question for you. Have you EVER seen ANYONE suggest that another poster refrain from offering their opinions on ANY thread? EVER? Would you be asking me to do this if my opinions were in line with yours?

What I do here I do completely within the rules. I am attempting to stay on the subject of the Opening Post. In spite of the warnings of the moderator, people continue to want to discuss ME. They are breaking the rules, not me. Why are we not seeing the calls to return to the subject of the opening post as we normally do when Luther comes up?

Guano – there are a LOT of people here who never post anything but come here to search for the Truth. What you are saying I think is that you don’t want those people to be exposed to all sides of this particular issue.

All that being said, I am willing to consider your proposal, assuming of course that you can convince me by way of your response. You said you had thought about this a lot so you will probably be able to help me overcome my misgivings.

I await your response. Once you have actually replied to the above points, I will be in a position give proper consideration to your proposal and then will be able to give you and answer.

 

[TertiumQuid]

Since you asked me for clarification in post number 347, have you come across any specifics on those executions in Saxony? I would be happy to do a search and report back here with whatever I learn. Given your obvious interest in the matter, how about you? Are you willing to do the same? BTW, what would be a ‘good start for you’ would be to answer this simple direct question.Topper

Almost anyone with a little elbow grease and Google can find information about executions in Lutheran lands in the 1530’s, including Saxony. I have never denied this, nor have I asked you or anyone (or anyone on the Internet for that matter) to document executions in Lutheran lands in the 1530’s, including Saxony. You brought up Wittenberg in the 1530’s, and I asked you for the specifics. I did not ask you, or anyone, anything about Saxony.

Indeed there were executions in Saxony. Search out these sources:

Valentin Weigel, *German Religious Dissenter, Speculative Theorist, and Advocate of Tolerance *

John S. Oyer, Lutheran Reformers Against Anabaptists

Peter Pestel, The Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia

Once again: Saxony was never something I raised. Please provide specifics on executions in Wittenberg in the 1530’s, in which Luther played a part (recall you said he reigned in Wittenberg).

This should be clear, and not open to being interpreted to be about “Saxony.” Who knows? You may actually find something about Wittenberg in the 1530’s. I’ve not found anything yet.

 

[Topper17]

Almost anyone with a little elbow grease and Google can find information about executions in Lutheran lands in the 1530’s, including Saxony. I have never denied this, nor have I asked you or anyone (or anyone on the Internet for that matter) to document executions in Lutheran lands in the 1530’s, including Saxony. You brought up Wittenberg in the 1530’s, and I asked you for the specifics. I did not ask you, or anyone, anything about Saxony.

Indeed there were executions in Saxony. Search out these sources:

Valentin Weigel, *German Religious Dissenter, Speculative Theorist, and Advocate of Tolerance *

John S. Oyer, Lutheran Reformers Against Anabaptists

Peter Pestel, The Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia

Once again: Saxony was never something I raised. Please provide specifics on executions in Wittenberg in the 1530’s, in which Luther played a part (recall you said he reigned in Wittenberg).

This should be clear, and not open to being interpreted to be about “Saxony.” Who knows? You may actually find something about Wittenberg in the 1530’s. I’ve not found anything yet.

Hi All,

Clearly I am not going to get a simple answer to a simple direct question, which means that I guess I am going to have to go searching for the information myself. So much for the test case which could have potentially changed my position about future dialogue.

With that being said, has anybody run across any specifics regarding Anabaptists being executed in Saxony?

Topper

 

[Tomyris]

Almost anyone with a little elbow grease and Google can find information about executions in Lutheran lands in the 1530’s, including Saxony. I have never denied this, nor have I asked you or anyone (or anyone on the Internet for that matter) to document executions in Lutheran lands in the 1530’s, including Saxony. You brought up Wittenberg in the 1530’s, and I asked you for the specifics. I did not ask you, or anyone, anything about Saxony.

Indeed there were executions in Saxony. Search out these sources:

Valentin Weigel, *German Religious Dissenter, Speculative Theorist, and Advocate of Tolerance *

John S. Oyer, Lutheran Reformers Against Anabaptists

Peter Pestel, The Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia

Once again: Saxony was never something I raised. Please provide specifics on executions in Wittenberg in the 1530’s, in which Luther played a part (recall you said he reigned in Wittenberg).

This should be clear, and not open to being interpreted to be about “Saxony.” Who knows? You may actually find something about Wittenberg in the 1530’s. I’ve not found anything yet.

Your penpal Dave Armstrong decided to help you on his blog. He stated

Swan would probably retort by saying that none of these seem to have been in Wittenberg itself. But that is an irrelevancy. They were carried out under Lutheran auspices, in Saxony: Luther’s home ground and the initial base of Lutheranism, with the direct assent and approval of Luther and Melanchthon. Where, specifically, the executions took place is entirely secondary to those considerations.

He did not however document the “direct assent and approval of Luther and Melanchthon.” We don’t have a signed and sealed note from Luther saying “Ja, getten Sie diese Muttonheads! Love und Kuessen, Martin.” So I think the proof is somewhat lacking and is speculative. Did Luther control secular events in Wittenberg? That is probably unproveable at this point. I don’t think the point can be pressed either way, that Luther directed killing or that he had nothing to do with it. I call it murky.

With both Catholics and Lutherans killing each other, I am not sure how much of a point such proof would make. Both Catholics and Lutherans killed Anabaptists.

 

[JonNC]

Your penpal Dave Armstrong decided to help you on his blog. He stated

He did not however document the “direct assent and approval of Luther and Melanchthon.” We don’t have a signed and sealed note from Luther saying “Ja, getten Sie diese Muttonheads! Love und Kuessen, Martin.” So I think the proof is somewhat lacking and is speculative. Did Luther control secular events in Wittenberg? That is probably unproveable at this point. I don’t think the point can be pressed either way, that Luther directed killing or that he had nothing to do with it. I call it murky.

With both Catholics and Lutherans killing each other, I am not sure how much of a point such proof would make. Both Catholics and Lutherans killed Anabaptists.

Something that should humble both communions, instead of arguing over who was worse.

Jon

 

[Tomyris]

Something that should humble both communions, instead of arguing over who was worse.

Jon

Well, the Anabaptists were not wholly innocent, either. There was much courage and Christian witness among them, and we have their descendants today, such as the Mennonites, but some were violent and dangerous. Like everything else about the Reformation, the situation was complex.

Bloodstained hands all around. God have mercy on us.

 

[Peter_J]

on his blog.

I’ve been there (a few weeks ago to be specific). Probably an interested place, but I couldn’t really say from one visit.

Shoot, now I’ve got a hankering for a “where’s your favorite place” thread.

 

[guanophore]

The first part of the topic is who was Luther.

Ok, I sit corrected.

He was a man who started his own church. So why is this off topic?

Because 1) He did not start his own church 2) the fact that there are Lutherans is not a factor in why he was excommunicated.

The man started his own movement with its own doctrine against the true church.

Yes, I think I could accept this statement. But the “movement” he meant to start was reform of the CC. He had no intention of starting his own church. Despite a lot of his writings, it is clear in all of them that he firmly believed in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. He thought the Pope and the Cardinals had abandoned it, and was unable to see past his personal feelings and prejudices against the hierarchy.

He certainly did move from a few complaints to a significant attitude of rebellion. You have to admit, it takes a lot of cheek to burn a papal bull.

I’ll give you this though the Catholic Church doesn’t call them churches either.

I think this might be unnecessarily divisive. There are many marks of the Church among those congregations influenced by Luther’s thought. Two examples are the PNCC and the Church of Norway, which have retained Apostolic Succession and a significant degree of Sacred Tradition. Lutherans and Anglicans also, unlike modern American fundamentalists, value sacred tradition.

One of the elements that will restore unity is for us to value the work of the Holy Spirit in these communities, and the extent to which they have retained the One Faith.

 

[TertiumQuid]

He did not however document the “direct assent and approval of Luther and Melanchthon.” We don’t have a signed and sealed note from Luther saying “Ja, getten Sie diese Muttonheads! Love und Kuessen, Martin.” So I think the proof is somewhat lacking and is speculative. Did Luther control secular events in Wittenberg? That is probably unproveable at this point. I don’t think the point can be pressed either way, that Luther directed killing or that he had nothing to do with it. I call it murky.

I find it fascinating that out of all the errors I’ve mentioned, this inquiry for clarification about Wittenberg in the 1530’s is the chosen hill of battle. I also find it very intriguing about this switch to Saxony in general rather than Wittenberg specifically. It downplays the following. If you visit the context of where my question comes from, you’ll find the following:

Originally Posted by Topper17 View Post
In fact, there actually were executions in Wittenberg in the 1530’s during Luther’s reign there.

I asked for clarification on this specific point. I did not ask for research that anyone with Google could find in 10 minutes about Saxony or various other Lutheran lands. There may in fact be such documentation- it will probably be up to me to find it.

When I posed the question, I was genuinely interested in the specific documentation. This little example has not been brought up to try to alleviate either Luther or the Reformers in general from the well-known fact that Protestant areas believed and practiced capital punishment. Rather, I brought it up as one of a number assertions that have been posted that, when scrutinized, appear to be either unsubstantiated, out-of-context, or anachronistic. This one so far I would classify as unsubstantiated.

 

[guanophore]

And who’s to say Luther would not have deferred to the Catholic church regarding the canon had a truly ecumenical council taken place within in lifetime? It’s conjecture either way. You do not know and neither do I. He never “judged for himself” about the worthiness of books any more or less than Cardinal Cajetan, Eusebius or Erasmus.

The difference between Luther and all the other NT scholars who had ideas about the Deuterocanonical books is that all the rest of them deferred to the ruling of the Church.

That attitude that his own opinion was equal to that of the Church is what eventually got him excommunicated.

 

[Tomyris]

I find it fascinating that out of all the errors I’ve mentioned, this inquiry for clarification about Wittenberg in the 1530’s is the chosen hill of battle.

One of the neuroses of CAF is to pick one of the most picayune and irrelevant issues in the face of the really important and fight to death over what can’t really be proven.

I also find it very intriguing about this switch to Saxony in general rather than Wittenberg specifically. It downplays the following. If you visit the context of where my question comes from, you’ll find the following:

I asked for clarification on this specific point. I did not ask for research that anyone with Google could find in 10 minutes about Saxony or various other Lutheran lands. There may in fact be such documentation- it will probably be up to me to find it.

When I posed the question, I was genuinely interested in the specific documentation. This little example has not been brought up to try to alleviate either Luther or the Reformers in general from the well-known fact that Protestant areas believed and practiced capital punishment. Rather, I brought it up as one of a number assertions that have been posted that, when scrutinized, appear to be either unsubstantiated, out-of-context, or anachronistic. This one so far I would classify as unsubstantiated.

I think it is unsubstantiated. We need to establish, first, how much control Luther had over the civil government of Wittenberg. Since he was locked up in a castle for some of the time and was, according to some, a political pawn, I wonder. Like everything else about the Reformation, it was probably complex and now buried under 400+ years of rhetoric and slander from both sides. I do not see him in a position to burn anyone. He may have advocated it and someone else did the deed, but I do not know what his reaction was to it.

 

[TertiumQuid]

This is what Emmalon Davis of CCEL Staff Writer has to say about Table Talk by Martin Luther: Martin Luther’s Table Talk then entitled Divine Discourses which was found preserved under the foundations of a German citizen’s home in 1626,

Mr. Davis is giving a summary of Henry Bell’s English translation of Luther’s Tischreden. For a critical evaluation of Bell’s claims, see: Preserved Smith, Luther’s Table Talk, A Critical Study (1907) pp. 76-81. Copies are available on-line. Smith questions the authenticity of much of Bell’s story of finding the book.

Table Talk contains a series of informal conversations Luther shared with his students and colleagues in his home. The topics of these conversations range from religious doctrines and history to instructions regarding government, church, and the academic university. Throughout this text, Luther presents his beliefs boldly, and at times, his opinions may seem extremely biased. While the ethical implications of Luther’s view are highly debated, Table Talk provides an uncensored look at Luther’s inluentical idea’s.

But unfortunately, it’s not a primary source, so it can only be used as secondary evidence at best. For a critical short overview of the difficulty of the authenticity and accuracy of this source, see the introductory material in Luther’s Works vol. 54.

Also Catholic’s; Protestants, Lutheran’s Puritan’s Calvinists have all persecuted each other. The 16th century was a bloody time all around and from what I have so far been able to gather from my own research the Lutheran’s were in some ways more violent then others during that same time.

I personally wouldn’t be able to determine who was worse than who throughout history. Frankly, I’m very pleased and relieved that Christians (of whatever stripe) are no longer killing people. I wonder sometimes how peaceful Muslims must feel about their faith when others claiming their same faith are killing people.

 

[guanophore]

Guano,
I am almost certain that I do not understand your ‘challenge’ that I refrain from posting my opinions, especially given that these forums are designed to allow people to freely express their opinions. On the face of it, your ‘challenge’ is extremely odd, (to say the very least).

Perhaps I did not present it well. I am speaking specifically about your work on this thread, and your tendency to weave your opinions and conclusions into the citations you are giving. I am challenging you to try summarizing your research then leading your reader to draw their own conclusion, rather than drawing it for them.

You insult me in virtually every post to me and then in the ONE in which you don’t, you ‘challenge’ me to not post my opinions? And then when I don’t just immediately ‘snap to’, you get angry? What’s up with that (whole thing)?

I am not angry Topper, I am sad and disappointed. You seem like a bright, motivated, capable and potentially very effective apologist.

 

[guanophore]

Sorry I missed this post Topper. I have been using the “view last read” button so I thought I didn’t skip any!

Guano,
This is an interesting proposal, one that certainly marks a huge change in your demeanor towards me. Now, I’m not saying that I am suspicious but it appears that you might have decided the more I am insulted, slandered, and falsely accused, the more strident my posts become.

My complaint has to do with your method, not your content.

I am surprised you posted this, since we are having so much trouble staying on topic I will answer it privately because my entire response will be off topic!

 

[TertiumQuid]

Given that you have stated that what ‘interests you is the factual information on the Reformation’, I would think that you would have been a little more forthcoming in regards to my request. As in all of these kinds of situations, the real truth lies in the details and it is the details of those executions that interests me. When you asked me for the details, you obviously didn’t have any, otherwise you wouldn’t have asked. So, again, I ask: Since you asked me for clarification in post number 347, have you come across any specifics on those executions in Saxony? I would be happy to do a search and report back here with whatever I learn. Given your obvious interest in the matter, how about you? Are you willing to do the same? Topper

Yes, I have details of the death penalty carried out in various Protestant lands, which is why I previously directed you to a few sources for your own research (there’s no need to take my word at face value). You would very much enjoy John S. Oyer, Lutheran Reformers Against Anabaptists (Arkansas: Baptist Standard Bearer, reprint) and also from the same series, Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren (ibid.). The sources are there- people can come to their own conclusions.

I’m actually not interested in the explicit details of who the protestants or the catholics killed in the 16th century, perhaps others are. The information is readily available on Google, so I see no reason to waste bandwidth with cut-and-pastes. If you feel the need to cut-and-paste easily available information, be my guest.

When you’ve finished with this tidbit, you could shed some light on some other things- like Luther’s 24 year course work, or which edition of “On the Papacy at Rome”, 1520" you have, or why Oberman says, “But in Luther’s time the contrary was the case: so unsettled a person, it was thought, should chose the safe path and enter a monastery,” etc.

 

[TertiumQuid]

We don’t have a signed and sealed note from Luther saying “Ja, getten Sie diese Muttonheads! Love und Kuessen, Martin.” So I think the proof is somewhat lacking and is speculative. Did Luther control secular events in Wittenberg? That is probably unproveable at this point. I don’t think the point can be pressed either way, that Luther directed killing or that he had nothing to do with it. I call it murky. With both Catholics and Lutherans killing each other, I am not sure how much of a point such proof would make. Both Catholics and Lutherans killed Anabaptists.

To visit your last point first, there isn’t a point in my opinion. I can though understand why some defending Catholicism would bring up the fact that earlier generations of protestants were involved with capital punishment: some modern-day protestants don’t know their own history and may argue against catholics using the same sort of facts. I’ve tried to not use arguments like this, like: the catholic church killed people, etc. because if an argument works against your own position, it isn’t valid.

As to your first point, the closest thing available are memorandums of 1531 and 1536 written by Melanchthon and signed by Luther. These were influential with the governments affiliated with the Lutheran reformers. Lutheran historian Roland Bainton thinks Luther wasn’t happy to sign them- for they supported capital punishment for sedition and blasphemy. Bainton also holds that later in the 1540’s Luther changed his opinion that only seditious Anabaptists should be executed, the other banished. Bainton though cites a Table Talk entry for proof, and i don’t recall looking into it much further. I may have, I don’t recall. See Roland Bainton, Here I Stand, chapter 22.

 

[TertiumQuid]

One of the neuroses of CAF is to pick one of the most picayune and irrelevant issues in the face of the really important and fight to death over what can’t really be proven.

Well said- this happens often on discussion boards.

 

[guanophore]

You know you folks who claim to be members of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church…ome of you saying something like after all we recite the creed remind me of Mormons whom I have met who tell me that their Church is Jesus’ Church after all the name of their church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Get it?

You seem really frustrated in your quest to prove that your separated brethren are not really your brethren. Your own Church teaches that they are members of His One Body through baptism. Comparing them to non-Christians seems an outright denial of the catechism.

   If my pointing out that Luther started his own church after he was ex-communicated from the True Church bugs you well so be it.

One has to wonder what gratification you might glean by pandering such falsehoods. It does nothing to heal the wounds of unity, and is easily historically disproven. The Reformation quickly got away from Luther, much to his own disappointment. He did not have the power or authority to start his own Church. You can’t have it both ways, Annie.

 He needed to have some sign from God just like Jesus did to prove that he was from God.  He had none.

You may not be able to accept that Luther believed he was following a conscience informed by God, but he really did believe that he was led by the Spirit. He wrote and said many things which he felt compelled to do in conscience. Topper and others have pointed out in detail how it is that his conscience may have been less than wholesome for a variety of reasons, but that does not change the fact that he was faithful to what he believed was right.

. So you are a corporation not a Church? You certainly are not Catholic.

On the contrary, Annie, faithful Lutherans have significantly more Catholicity than the majority of American Catholics. Just for starters, we see them in Church every Sunday, confessing their sins, and applying themselves to be faithful disciples of Christ. How is it that you are unable to affirm these works of the Holy Spirit?

It is true that the canon was only pronounced de fide at Trent but the canon was there since the Councils of Hippo and Carthage and the Catholic Church defined which books made it into the New Testament and which didn’t. Probably the council fathers studied the (complete) Muratorian Fragment and other documents, including, of course, the books in question themselves, but it was not until these councils that the Church officially settled the issue.

This is totally off topic and seems to be a recurrent theme in a rant.

What is your goal?

 

[guanophore]

Luther followed his conscience and has been judged.

It certainly seems like you and Topper have judged him.

His followers must rightly inform their consciences and will also be judged.

I think if there is a more receptive and courteous venue, many people can use CAF to inform their conscience.

Nominalism has done much damage and patting those who need to come home and happy talking to them does them no favors.

I am not sure what you mean by the use of the term “nominalism” here.

What does it mean “patting those who need to come home”?

Does scolding them and discounting their faith work better than “patting”?

What is “happy talking”? Are you saying it is not possible to follow the command of the Apostle to use gentleness and reverence?

"Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence; " (1 Pe 3:15–16)