Topic: Luther & Indulgences
Question:
The protestant my wife is dialoging with has now taken to the historical attack. She states that Martin Luther broke with the Chruch because the Pope was selling indulgences. Was it the Pope or wayward bishops who were selling indulgences at the time?
Answer:
Art Sippo has provided an answer to this question. You can read it here.
I will add the following:
#1 - Luther's problem was not with indulgences, per se. It was somebody having authority OVER him. That, accompanied by his psychological imbalance (which is widely acknowledged by even Protestant scholarship today), caused his break with Rome. Luther was a pretty sick fellow. Read about Luther and the other Reformers' rather embarassing comments here.
Here are a few excerpts:
1. Luther: Revolutionary Invective / The Peasants' Revolt
"The Pope and the Cardinals . . . since they are blasphemers, their tongues ought to be torn out through the back of their necks, and nailed to the gallows!" (92:94/35) "It were better that every bishop were murdered . . . than that one soul should be destroyed . . . If they will not hear God's Word . . . what do they better deserve than a strong uprising which will sweep them from the earth? And we would smile did it happen. All who contribute body, goods . . . that the rule of the bishops may be destroyed are God's dear children and true Christians." (122:377/36)
"If you understand the Gospel rightly, I beseech you not to believe that it can be carried on without tumult, scandal, sedition . . . The word of God is a sword, is war, is ruin, is scandal . . ." (109:41/37)
"If we punish thieves with the gallows . . . why do we not still more attack with every kind of weapon . . . these Cardinals, these Popes, and that whole abomination of the Romish Sodom . . . why do we not wash our hands in their blood?" (109:41/38)
"If I had all the Franciscan friars in one house, I would set fire to it . . . To the fire with them!" (51;v.6:247/39)
#2 - The pope (or the bishops in Germany) did not approve of the "selling of indulgences". True, there were abuses that priests and bishops did not correct and check. However, the Church has never taught that money remits temporal punishment for sin. Ever. And that, in the end, is the important question - not the failure of Church officials to check abuse. Read about St. Paul and the abuses of the Eucharist in 1 Cor 11:17-29. Do you see a new Church being started? No. Do you see St. Paul separating himself from the Christian communion because of the abuse? No. You see him trying to correct it WITHIN the body. The same standard should be applied to the question of Luther and the abuse of indulgences.
#3 - Ask your wife's Protestant friend to show you ONE biblical case where God approves of rebellion against ecclesiatical authority for ANY reason. Then, after he has not found any instances, tell him to read this:
"The men said, "This is the day the LORD spoke of when he said to you, `I will give your enemy into your hands for you to deal with as you wish.'" Then David crept up unnoticed and cut off a corner of Saul's robe. Afterward, David was conscience-stricken for having cut off a corner of his robe. He said to his men, "The LORD forbid that I should do such a thing to my master, the LORD's anointed, or lift my hand against him; for he is the anointed of the LORD." With these words David rebuked his men and did not allow them to attack Saul. And Saul left the cave and went his way. Then David went out of the cave and called out to Saul, "My lord the king!" When Saul looked behind him, David bowed down and prostrated himself with his face to the ground." (1 Samuel 24:4-8)
#4 - Ask her Protestant friend if he thinks that a poor disciplinary judgement on his part against his children (if he has any), nullifies the authority he has over them.
John Pacheco
The Catholic Legate
August 14, 2001