Luther's Thesis

[Catholic Crusader]

I was re-reading Luther's Thesis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_95_Theses

...and realized that most of them really do not differ from what the Catholic Church teaches. Is there any way to tackle these one by one without turning the thread into another war of the worlds? I think much ado has been made of this trifle which was never neccessary. I think if Luther had kept his cool, he would have seen most of these things ironed out.

 

[handy]

What were the 41 points that the Pope wanted Luther to recant? Does anyone know?

 

[Vic C.]

I was re-reading Luther's Thesis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_95_Theses

...and realized that most of them really do not differ from what the Catholic Church teaches. Is there any way to tackle these one by one without turning the thread into another war of the worlds? I think much ado has been made of this trifle which was never neccessary. I think if Luther had kept his cool, he would have seen most of these things ironed out.

In reality, it wasn't Luther's intent to revolutionize Christianity.

He did open the door for reformation though. :-D

I'm glad you are taken a second look at his theses and I too am interested in an answer to Dora's question. I guess I'm too lazy (and tired) to research it myself.

:

 

[handy]

Well, since I'm on 'cow watch' tonight, I guess I'll do some research in between the times I have to hike out to the pasture in the middle of howling wind and blowing snow flurries to shine a flashlight on one of the cow's heinie to see if her baby is coming along OK.

Y'all feelin' sorry for me now? Here it is, 12:30 am and I bet y'all are just snuggled up warm in bed, while I'm looking at cow butts.

And looking up Luther!

 

[handy]

Well, that didn't take too long.

Here is a link to the Exsurge Domini of Leo X, regarding Luther:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/L10EXDOM.HTM

Now, for another question:

Are there any points that Leo brought up that the church no longer teaches?

Well, guess I'd better grab my coat and flashlight!

 

[Catholic Crusader]

He did open the door for reformation though.

Remember: The Church has gone through many upheavals of reformation through the centuries. Pope St Gregory the Great was considered a big reformer. The difference between those reforms and Luther is that they did not break away from the Church, and always recognized the Church as being the final authority in such matters.

But, reading Luther's thesis, I would say its all in how you take it. I can read them from two different angles and get two different meanings, as I can with Church documents today. Perhaps some of the one's the Pope wanted recanted was more because the Pope was personally offended. Thats what happened with Galileo: He was tried more because he was rude and offended the pope, rather than because of his scientific theories which others before him had espoused without retribution.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Here is a good example:

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

As I said in another thread, a Catholic council had ALREADY condemned the sales of indulgences before Luther wrote this. The fact that unscrupulous priests were still doing it does not reflect Church teaching. Heck, even today, we have priests going off the deep end doing things the pope has specirfically said NOT to do. What's new?

 

[handy]

Yes, but the thesis' against indulgenses are on the list that Leo wanted Luther to recant.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Yes, but the thesis' against indulgenses are on the list that Leo wanted Luther to recant.

I was talking about the SALES of indulgences. Indulgences in and of themselves are legitimate, although I am sure you disagree.

 

[mondar]

Remember: The Church has gone through many upheavals of reformation through the centuries. Pope St Gregory the Great was considered a big reformer. The difference between those reforms and Luther is that they did not break away from the Church,

Is there anything specific in the 95 thesis that demonstrates intent on the part of Luther to break away from the Church? In fact, before the December 1520 Papal Bull of excommunication, what can be pointed to in Luthers behavior which suggests he desired a split with Rome?

and always recognized the Church as being the final authority in such matters.

Can you prove this assertion? Evidence please?

But, reading Luther's thesis, I would say its all in how you take it. I can read them from two different angles and get two different meanings, as I can with Church documents today. Perhaps some of the one's the Pope wanted recanted was more because the Pope was personally offended. Thats what happened with Galileo: He was tried more because he was rude and offended the pope, rather than because of his scientific theories which others before him had espoused without retribution.

I am not sure what you are saying in this paragraph. It seems as if you are saying that Luther was not mistaken in the 95 thesis, but he was rude to the pope?

 

[Catholic Crusader]

...Perhaps some of the one's the Pope wanted recanted was more because the Pope was personally offended.....

I am not sure what you are saying in this paragraph....

I was referring to an earlier post about the particular thesis the pope wanted recanted. Some of them needed to be recanted, but I'll bet others simply offended the pope's sensibilities.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Are there any points that Leo brought up that the church no longer teaches?

Well, as with many teachings, the problem is often what the teaching actually consists of verses what people's perception of the teaching is. I'd say half the protestant/Catholic arguments happen over the fact that we simply misunderstand what each other is saying.

 

[handy]

I thoroughly agree CC! Which is why I think delving into the 95 thesis, which Luther posted in order to reform the Church from within (never to break away from the Church, Mondar, Luther had no desire to do that) could go a long way towards understanding the divisions of the church today.

We already see that 54 of the 95 thesis weren't challeged by the Church, in that Leo X didn't call for Luther to recant them. Of the 41 thesis that were challenged, it would be interesting to see how the Catholic Church views these particular issues today.

In other words, has the Church over time reconciled, within itself, more of these issues?

(Hope I'm making myself clear here. I'm very tired this morning. :morning: )

 

[Catholic Crusader]

I thoroughly agree CC! Which is why I think delving into the 95 thesis, which Luther posted in order to reform the Church from within (never to break away from the Church, Mondar, Luther had no desire to do that) could go a long way towards understanding the divisions of the church today.

We already see that 54 of the 95 thesis weren't challeged by the Church, in that Leo X didn't call for Luther to recant them. Of the 41 thesis that were challenged, it would be interesting to see how the Catholic Church views these particular issues today.

In other words, has the Church over time reconciled, within itself, more of these issues?

(Hope I'm making myself clear here. I'm very tired this morning. :morning: )

Yes. I belive that SOME of those 41 were just a matter of misunderstandin rather than actual differences. Can you list those 41?

 

[cyberjosh]

As I said in another thread, a Catholic council had ALREADY condemned the sales of indulgences before Luther wrote this. The fact that unscrupulous priests were still doing it does not reflect Church teaching.

With Tetzel on the loose and him being employed by Albert of Mainz to pay back Pope Leo X this seems hard to believe. Even if you are right then it would seem it was not enforced well:

Meanwhile to pay for the pallium of the see of Mainz and to discharge the other expenses of his elevation, Albert had borrowed 21,000 ducats from Jacob Fugger, and had obtained permission from Pope Leo X to conduct the sale of indulgences in his diocese to obtain funds to repay this loan, as long as half the collection was forwarded to the Papacy. An agent of the Fuggers subsequently traveled in the Cardinal's retinue in charge of the cashbox. For this work he procured the services of John Tetzel, and so indirectly exercised a potent influence on the course of the Reformation.

It was as a disgusted response to Tetzel's activities selling indulgences that Martin Luther wrote his famous 95 Theses, which he sent to Albert on 31 October 1517 and traditionally nailed to the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg. Albert forwarded the theses to Rome, suspecting them of heresy.

BTW what Pope Leo X let Albert of Mainz do is called Simony, a practice explicitly forbidden by the Church in the 1300s (I believe). Paying for office is a corrupt practice. Not many people knew of the middle-man in all of this, Albert of Mainz, but his actions are what triggered the chain reaction of events leading to Luther's reforms - which I suspect could have been avoided if Albert of Mainz had resorted to more legitimate means of obtaining office, or (given that he did pay for it) have a tighter grip on his "fund-raiser" man (Tetzel).

 

[Catholic Crusader]

....Even if you are right then it would seem it was not enforced well... ....what Pope Leo X let Albert of Mainz do is called Simony, a practice explicitly forbidden by the Church in the 1300s (I believe). Paying for office is a corrupt practice......

Thank you for proving my point. Luther's argument was not with official church teaching, but with unscrupulous practices of individuals. So what's new? Luckily the modern popes have been very Godly men, but at the bishop/priest level we still have our share of jackasses. Should I break away from the Church over that? Should I leave Peter because of Judas? NEVER! I don't care how sinful my popes and priests are, because I am a sinner too. How DARE a person point the finger at a bad priest and use that as a reason to rip the Body of Christ to shreds, when that person is just as responsible for the stripes on Christ's body as the worst pope ever was. (Sorry - that subject gets me a little worked up.)

 

[handy]

Catholic Crusader getting worked up!?! Boy, we thought we'd never see that happen! :-D

As for coming up with a comparative list, yes, I should do so. I haven't because I really am bushed today, and the next few days are going to be just as busy. Don't look for me to be around much. Maybe by Sunday or Monday, I'll have time to do that.

 

[cyberjosh]

Thank you for proving my point. Luther's argument was not with official church teaching, but with unscrupulous practices of individuals. So what's new? Luckily the modern popes have been very Godly men, but at the bishop/priest level we still have our share of jackasses. Should I break away from the Church over that?

Well as I understand it all of Luther's 95 theses were not centered around indulgences. It was probably just the last "straw" in a long line of other things that bothered him, where Tetzel's preaching finally sparked him to action. It seemed like he used that as a spring board and opportunity to bring up greivances. In addition Luther was a conservative reformer (unlike Zwingli), and (if the movie about him is in the least bit accurate) he showed respect to Cardinal Cajetan to whom he was at first supposed to recant (much before the Diet of Worms), and he explained his actions by quoting the Churches own doctrines and Cajetan actually agreed on a few of his grievances. Now the movie may not be entirely accurate but that scene struck me when it showed Luther respectfully kneeling before Cajetan and sincerely confessing his reservations and quoting scripture and Church doctrine to support it.

Also you do know that the Reformation quickly got out of Luther's hands don't you? There were soon after riots on Catholic Churches by the people, violent riots, which Luther by no means ever wanted to see happen. The common people took the idea and ran with it to an extreme, while the main reformers after Luther took a more calm approach to it.

Just trying to interject some reason to this discussion. And as you yourself noted, Luther in many places did not disagree with Church Doctrine.

~Josh

 

[Catholic Crusader]

....Also you do know that the Reformation quickly got out of Luther's hands don't you? There were soon after riots on Catholic Churches by the people, violent riots, which Luther by no means ever wanted to see happen.....

I meant to tackle this subject earlier with an analogy:

If an Army General wants to reform the military, then sets out insulting his superiors, how far do you think he will get with his reforms? He will more likely get a court martial rather than his reforms.

The continued statements that Luther didn't really want to break away are a bit disingenuous. Year after year of insulting the pope is more likey to get you booted out of the Church than get you an audience with his holiness. Frankly, I think the pope - a man with a medieval mindset - showed great forbearance in waiting so many years before giving Herr Luther the swift kick in the arse he deserved. I mean, really: How far would you get in your job if you wanted to introduce some innovations and started out by insulting your boss?

 

[cyberjosh]

The continued statements that Luther didn't really want to break away are a bit disingenuous.

I didn't say he didn't want to break away, I said he did not approve of the violence and that he was a relatively conservative reformer. That's all I said.