Monday, October 8, 2007

Focus Paper #4

Focus Paper #4
October 8, 2007

This selection of readings focused particularly on Martin Luther and the events that led up to the eventual Protestant Reformation which resulted from his actions. He wrote his 95 Theses and posted them on the Church door – although it is debatable whether he literally posted them, or mailed (posted) them. Either way, the effect that his writing had was tremendous. There was much uproar as a result, and authorities were against him and wanted him to appear in Rome for a trial and debate about everything he had protested. One of the things which his 95 Theses focused on was the selling of indulgences, and how they should not be allowed because they should not be the way that a person is able to repent for his sins, and should not be able to absolve all sins. One claim that some of the indulgence sellers, such as Tetzel, made was that even if someone committed a sin as great as “violating the mother of God” (75), that this person could simply buy an indulgence and his sin would be revoked. Another thing which Luther refuted in his 95 Theses was the actions of the Pope and Catholic Church, and also how money was being collected through the indulgences in order to finish construction work on various buildings. He felt that the Pope should use his own money for such situations. Luther also addressed how the Popes paralleled themselves with God and how if they were to approve of something (such as indulgences, etc), then God too would approve.

When Luther did meet with the authorities about his action of posting his 95 Theses and their response to his writing, one of the things which came about was that they wanted Luther to revoke what he had written and say that he had been wrong in what he said. However, Luther refused to do such a thing and would not go back on his beliefs. The result of this was that he was excommunicated and had to leave the area (he was placed under “imperial ban”). However, instead of leaving, he went into hiding with the help of a friend, Prince Frederick, and lived for a year disguised as a knight in Frederick’s Wartburg Castle (he was captured on his way back to Wittenberg by Frederick’s order).

I can not imagine what it would be like to be Luther during this time. He was simply voicing his opinion, and ended up in front of the high courts and the pope in a religious debate. It is likely that many of the things which he disagreed with, others disagreed with as well. It does not seem like he was expecting to cause the effects which he did on society and religion as a whole. Rather, he may have wanted something done about things such as indulgences and the like, but I do not think this was his main purpose in writing – to actually get something done. I think he had just decided to voice his opinion and let it be known that the actions of the Church were not all pure. However, in so doing, the effects were much larger than any which may have otherwise been imagined. They were so large, in fact, that a whole period of reform ensued not long after. Luther had become an idol to many and had many followers and those who studied his writings and followed his beliefs.

I am anxious to continue on in the reading about Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation. I want to see if he played an active role in the Reformation, or if it was more his ideas which were the most active. Did he lead the rebellion against the Catholic Church, or was it those who studied and practiced his beliefs that did so? Either way, I am definitely interested in learning the details of the Reformation. I think Luther was right in what he wrote, and I want to see the actions which came about as a result.

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Focus Paper #3

Focus Paper #3
September 25, 2007

In Response to the Debate

I thought that the class debate on Monday turned out very well. It was definitely an interesting way to learn about the different perspectives on religion which we have been discussing during class. It also made it easier to understand the viewpoints of the Catholic Church, Thomas a Kempis, and Erasmus.

The Pope Leo X side focused largely on how God is the Supreme Power, and how spiritual things surpass all temporal things. It also claimed that in order for the soul to be saved, one must go through the Church.

Thomas a Kempis’ main claim was that one should live a life of solitude and stay away from society, in order to best serve God. He also said that it is okay to feel bad in life, because in the long run, you will be better off. A life of sorrow leads to an (afterlife) of happiness.
Erasmus found it best to read the Bible and to develop one’s own understanding of the Scripture. He did not find it sufficient to simply listen to another and “learn” from them. He believed that by keeping your mind focused on a righteous path, you would be able to resist temptations which exist everywhere in the world.

I think that all groups did a good job of presenting their sides and getting their points across. If I were to be the people who were listening to each of the cases of the debate, I would have to say that I would pick Erasmus’ perspective on religious life and the best way to live. I agree with Pope Leo X’s case that God is the Supreme Power; however, I do not believe that it is necessary for someone to direct all of their dealings with God through the means of the Church. For me, religion is a private matter, and does not require the involvement of a higher organization.

I have already discussed the absurdity of Thomas a Kempis’ work in my previous focus paper, so I will not go into detail about his case here. Basically though, I feel that his beliefs that everyone should live in solitude do not make sense at all – how can one thrive in life and religion if he is not able to discuss it with others? Furthermore, how is it possible to procreate (as God desires) if we are not supposed to interact with others?

This leaves Erasmus’ perspective, which I have already depicted as “the best”. Erasmus just makes the most sense to me, perhaps because his is the most modern version out of the three. Erasmus wants us to understand religion on our own and not simply rely on others, and he does not find it necessary for us to separate ourselves from the rest of society (just to do what we need to do to avoid sin and temptation). His view not only seems the most logical, but the most practical as well.