The Reformations
Lisa M. Lane 2008
Creative Commons License
The text and audio by Lisa M. Lane is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License.

Lisahistory: The Reformations

Transcript

>> Any questions about anything else before we got started on the Reformations? Yes, [inaudible].

>> Is that the Catholic Church?

>> No.

>> It's not?

>> It isn't. What tends to happen as you move away from the Catholic Churches into the other is, to the uninitiated, you can walk in and it would look very similar. Some telling differences are the lectern. In a Catholic Church you very rarely see a place for the priest to speak whereas in all of the Protestant churches, there's either special dials or special location up high or something where the preacher or minister can talk directly to everybody, whereas in the Catholic, it tends to be much more ceremonial, centered on the altar at the front. So that's one way to tell them. It's not 100 percent. There are Catholic Churches that are more modernized, that have a location where the priest can actually speak from, but that's a little more rare in a Catholic Church, so I noticed. I say Reformations with an S. Most people say the Reformation, but there are 2, there's the Protestant Reformation and what we call the Catholic Reformation. Some people consider the Catholic Reformation to be a response to the Protestant Reformation, some say it would've happened anyway, it was on the way. So there are really 2 of them. We have to go back to the Christian humanism to our Renaissance tradition to understand where some of the criticism of the Catholic Church comes from and why people can make an argument that the Catholic Church was already starting to somewhat [inaudible]. The 2 Christian humanists, and they're both northerners, Thomas More is English and Erasmus is Dutch, and they wrote letters to each other that were sent across the English Channel, and they both wrote and published in Latin and in their vernacular language. These guys were some of the most outspoken critics of the church. So, for example, Thomas More here, a quote from his book, Utopia, which setup this fantastic sort of science fiction kind of society. So he's talking about what this fictitious society how they do religion. And he's saying, "These are their religious principles, that the soul of man is immortal, and that God of his goodness has designed that it should be happy; and that he has therefore appointed rewards for good and virtuous actions, and punishments for vice, to be distributed after this life." In other words, that is the simplest kind of Christianity you can possibly have. He wrote that one people were created with free will. If they do good things, they're rewarded. They do bad things; they're punished in the next life after they die. Pretty simple straightforward kind of thing. And that the intention here, the soul is immortal and that's why it moves on to another's place and that God decided that the soul should be happy. Real simple basic Christianity. Most of the Christian humanist, that's what they were talking about. They were--did not see themselves as innovators or guys doing something new or coming up with a new idea, they saw themselves as bringing up from the past an old deity, a simple, basic Christianity, Christian faith. And they saw the church as having corrupted that and turned it into something else. So that's why I bring back the same quote that I had on the side for the Renaissance from Erasmus and his book In Praise of Folly. He's criticizing the pope much more directly than Thomas More is by saying that if he actually did his job, you know, catering to the flock and living Christianity instead of doing what he was doing, he'd be miserable, very unhappy, 'cause he's very busy doing other things. I mean, what were the popes actually doing during the Renaissance instead of being good models of Christian ethics and morality?

>> Having a great time.

>> Having a great time. Yeah, going to war, sleeping with women, generally, being what we've called very worldly. And Erasmus is criticizing this even noting that the office of the pope has been purchased with swords, poison, and all force imaginable because people were literally killing each other to get to the high ranking political position. So you do have critics here. And there is a date I want you to remember occasionally, as you know there is, Martin Luther's 95 Theses, and therefore, the beginning of the Protestant Reformation is 1517. And you could see the dates on their work, right? It's right, right before that. Sometimes a decade or so before that, they're writing these criticisms. They are, by the way. They can't really be punished for saying these things because they're too far away. They are all the way in the Northern Europe, very far away from the pope. And because the popes are doing exactly what they say they're doing, they'd be busy to go after guys like these. Also, we find in the northern areas of Europe, as we get out of the late Middle Ages and things--trade started to pick up and things start to become a little more comfortable, we see that a lot of these ideas that are developing are developing in an environment where the church, the Catholic Church, really doesn't have that stronghold anymore anyway in these northern areas. Probably due to the fact and all that stuff and also partly due to the Renaissance and the way the popes are behaving. So these guys are pretty free to write what they want and publish it. They are aware and they critique the abuses of the church. We've already talked about the worldly pope. This is Alexander Borgia of the famous Borgia family. Machiavelli wrote The Prince for Cesare Borgia. And the daughter, Lucrezia Borgia, tended to poison people who didn't agree with her. It's a great crowd. If you ever wanna read them, then try to read that from the Borgia family. Good examples of worldly popes. But some other bigger bases that were on people's mind at the time include this one of pluralism. The way the church is supposed to be organized and we said it does when we look at the church originally is the pope have all these bishops, and each bishop has his own diocese and that's supposed to be the area that he kind of takes care of and all the priests are under him, taking care of the people. Remember that kind of pyramid model? Well, what was happening is that the bishops were making a lot of money off of each benefit, each diocese. And so they were starting to trade them and buy them and sell them to other people. So what would happen if you would have, for example, this was Ireland, each one of those areas in a slightly different color is a diocese, and you could have one bishop who could own 3 of them, say, in way different parts of the island, you know, far apart from each other. So bishop can sell, may or may not actually physically be present in any of these. Maybe he lives in France, but he's bought 3 dioceses in Ireland and so they're his. How much direct leadership do you figure is actually going on in this kind of situation?

>> Nothing.

>> Yeah, nothing. Yes, nothing's happening because, incidentally, these priests are pretty much on their own to do whatever they want and all they have to do is make sure to send the bill, you know, I mean, send the pay to the bishops. So they collect the tithes and they send a certain amount to the bishop. So he's making money just like an old medieval landlord, and he doesn't ever have to visit or check on any of his diocese. This is happening all over the place. It's called pluralism because what it is, is a bishop having more than one diocese. He's got more than one benefits, they call it, that's under his control. It's plural 'cause it's more than one.

>> So the non-bishop buy diocese to become a bishop?

>> No. Now, there were tricky ways to doing that, though, you know. You could--if you have the right friends and input the right people, you could become a bishop and then get a diocese. There's ways to do it. It's a very corrupt system and there--and money talks in the system. So it's possible to do this. Now, people like Erasmus and More are complaining then that there's no leadership and there's nobody in charge. The big one that gets Martin Luther going and so this is the one your chapter talks about is the practice of the church selling indulgences. And this is what an indulgence looks like. It's a piece of paper and it's signed by the pope. It's got a seal line and it essentially forgive you for your sin.

>> Pretty much like a ticket into heaven.

>> Yes, it's like a ticket into heaven. Now, these were developed not during this era. They were developed originally during the crusade, because a lot of those very Christian knights were very concerned that if they went off to the crusade and they got killed by an infidel, that there might not be a priest around and they might not get into heaven, that they would die with their sins on their head, that they would not be able to confess.

>> They wouldn't get last rites and so some of them didn't wanna go. So the pope at that time in the First Crusade, do you remember that, or on the second, he created this idea of the indulgence where the crusader could carry with them one of these. That essentially forgave them in advance for sins they might commit on the way, for the sin of killing your fellowmen, which you have to do in a war, right, and give them--they're taken into heaven should they die while they're out there. So it was a great deal, and it was given to the crusaders as they thank you for going and doing this holy job for us. It wasn't sold, it was given. Well, during Renaissance, Pope Julius the second decided he wanted a really grand Vatican City, and he wanted to hire the best of the best, you know, Michelangelo and Bernini and the guys to pretty up the place and make it into this grand palacio of papal city. Well the church didn't have quite enough money to do what it wanted to do, so they came up with this great money-raising idea. They would sell indulgences to pay the Renaissance artists and create the beautiful Vatican City that we have today. So they sold them. They gave them to these preachers who would go out and sell them and they gave the money. There's sort of a middleman involved here called an indulgence preacher who'd go out to draw up business and get people buy these things. And they were a great deal too because depending on how creative the indulgence preacher salesman wanted to be, you could buy one of these on Saturday afternoon for stuff you plan to do on Saturday night, you know, and have it to be good. Guilt--guilt took place here. All debts account for.

>> Aren't there people like forge it or anything?

>> There are people who--

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> It is. That was where the papal seal came in. That this thing had to be--had to be--had the papal seal and advance on it. They didn't give the indulgence preachers the seal, so they've only got a certain number, and they've got the seal on, and everybody, you know, it's a very difficult of course to seal. Yes, I'm sure there were forgeries. There kinda had to be. The only thing preventing mass amounts of forgeries is limited literacy, you know, the ability to write 'cause where are you gonna find any self-respecting monk whose gonna write one of these up for you. So we don't think there were a whole lot of forgeries but there were a whole lot of things. And it was Johann Tetzel, the indulgence preacher who came to Germany, who came to the Holy Roman Empire, to sell these that caught Martin Luther's attention. So in a lot of ways, it's the sale of indulgences that start the Protestant Reformation. I think my theory is that if an indulgence preacher hadn't come to Wittenberg, hadn't come to the spot where Martin Luther was teaching, and praying, and studying, it's quite possible all of this sort of happened very, very differently than it did, perhaps more slowly in a sort of an evolutionary way rather than a revolutionary way. But he did come selling indulgences.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> They are handwritten, okay. This particular one is printed 'cause it's from a little bit later. But yeah, they were handwritten out by the church.

[ Pause ]

>> The other big problem, the last of the big--big thing that the Christian humanists have pointed out was that the priest themselves who are left alone, right, 'cause the bishops aren't there, the priests themselves were extremely ignorant. The top part of this is Latin, and you'll notice it's got big direction written in of what are you supposed to do. This is the beginning of the Catholic mass. So the stage of direction, as I call them, are written in the parenthesis what you're supposed to do. And so you can see here translated that kissing the altar is part of the ceremony, a lot of priests didn't understand Latin. They didn't read it or write it because they haven't been properly trained, and they haven't gone to schools really to do this. And over the years of neglect without any bishops and without the church really caring, a lot of them were completely ignorant of the ceremonies, of the theology, and most particularly, of the language of the Catholic Church. They really didn't know what they were doing. So they were doing a lot of the ceremonies wrong. So if you are an educated Catholic and both Erasmus and Sir Thomas More were educated Catholics, you knew that because you went to church and you understood what the priest was trying to say except usually the pronunciation was lousy, and so you have an idea of what was supposed to be going on and you knew it wasn't happening. But nobody asked it because these are ordinary populace, they're not gonna get it. It's mumbled Latin words and then some magic and you're done. And all you have to do is sit there to be saved. So that was bothering people who were Christians who cared about the ceremonies and what they meant. Luther himself, of course, was educated, was a priest, so wrote, read Latin, Greek, German. Johann Tetzel comes to Wittenberg where he's teaching at the university and sets up this whole process. Now the reason he sets up a process is because Luther had just before Tetzel's arrival, had several years of spiritual crisis himself, a personal crisis. He felt that no matter what he did, he wasn't saved. Do you remember the mechanical piety that people were encouraged to do during the play, during the late Middle Ages, you know, say prayers 100 times a day and go to confession a lot, and just do all these kind of wrote thing to try to gain salvation and make yourself feel better. He tried all of those because that's what the church and his own understanding as a priest told him to do. Pray more. If you--if this isn't working, pray more, confess more, et cetera, et cetera. He tried all of that, and he still didn't feel save. He fasted. He did all these things, and he still felt helplessly sinful and he couldn't shake it. This poor guy is trying to teach 'cause he's at the university there, he's trying to study, he's trying to write, and he's just overcome with this depression and is feeling that no matter what he physically does he is a sinful person who God is not going to accept when he dies. As he thinks and meditates, as he explains here, and he explained this later, this is after the fact, okay. This isn't like [inaudible]. Later on people were saying, "Martin, how did this happen?" So he wrote again, "I meditated night and day on those words until at last, by the mercy of God, I paid attention to their context." And here's the words he was meditating on. "The justice of God is revealed in it, as it is written, the just person lives by faith", okay. So your chapter called this Justification by Faith. It also referred to as salvation by faith alone. So, I want to show here how that's different from what the Catholic Churches say. The Catholic Church says you need 2 things to be saved, yes, saved absolutely. To count that as maybe 50 percent, okay. The rest of it is the action that comes from the faith. You have to do something about it. That's called good work. You have to participate in the sacrament. You have to go to confession. You have to go to church. You have to give to charity. You have to pray. There has to be, in other words, an external manifestation of your faith. It's not enough to just believe. So you have to give both. And in fact, the Catholic Church taught that there was a Treasury of Merit, kind of like karma where you've got good deeds and bad deeds, and that they're gonna be weighed, you're going to be judged. I mean this kind of thing we saw all the way back in ancient Egypt when your life was judged in the afterlife. This is a very similar concept. Well, that judging, when God does it, it's gonna take place not just on your faith but on the things that you've done. Very communitarian, you have to help one another, you have to participate. Luther decided that good work doe nothing because, of course you see, he tried all these good works himself, and none of them had done any good, and he came to the conclusion that it's just faith, 100 percent faith and the church is wrong. Yeah, this kinda relates to More's Utopia, the basic goodness of Christianity, if you've got that, that's all you need. So that's the conclusion that Luther came to. And I think that one that probably remain is that personal thing, you know, he felt so much better now. He was able to focus now. Everything is good once he came to this conclusion. Maybe it would have just stayed inside Martin Luther himself and didn't kinda make him a better person, except that Tetzel comes to town. Johann Tetzel was an indulgence preacher. And he comes--and he was one of [inaudible] that day.

>> So he had a little bell, he had a box that people put their money in, and he had a little bell, and he sold the kind of Saturday night indulgences that I mentioned, then he advertise them too. Indulgences were supposed to be purchased, but the church told their preachers is that the idea is to buy them not for yourself, but for people in your family who've died, who are sitting in purgatory because they didn't live good enough life to get right into heaven. So if you buy indulgences, you're buying it for your dad, for your grandpa, somebody who died who you're aren't quite sure was saintly enough to get right into heaven, and was probably sitting in the waiting room of purgatory up there, waiting for somebody to assuage his sins. You could do that by buying an indulgence in his name. Well, Tetzel didn't talk about any of that, he talked about buying it for you, buy it for you, the Saturday night indulgence, that's what I call it. So Tetzel sold sumptuous of these and he said, "Whenever coin and copper ring, a soul from purgatory bring." If you want to buy for somebody else, you know, they would just jump right up if you paid enough money. He made a ton of money. And he set it up in the town square, which is right in front of the church, and right near the university, and Luther knows what he's doing, and it just makes him sick to his stomach to see this guy selling salvation. Because you see the conclusion he's come too, buying an indulgence would that be an act of faith or a good work in that system? Technically, it's a good work, right? I mean you and I may not see it that way, but technically buying an indulgence would be in this category, and that does not get you salvation. In addition to that, you have the whole just basic disgusting aspect of selling of indulgences in the first place, and Luther was not able to stay quiet about it. So what he did, and this is a very scholarly thing to do, this is what scholars do when they get upset, he called for debate on the issue. And in order to debate, you have to have a thesis. Some of you are still working on having a thesis. When you write something, I told you that theses have to be arguable. So the idea of having a scholarly debate is you get a few theses and you argue them. Instead of having 5 or 6, which is pretty normal for scholarly debate at a university, he came up with how many?

>> 95.

>> 95, and they said things like the pope has no right to remit sins that can only be remitted by God. Now, did they take that, yes or no?

>> Yes.

>> That kind of thing. But you get--you get some of the tone of that that people are not gonna miss the point he's trying to make with the 95 thesis. But he really didn't intend to have these debated, and he posted the list on the door of the church not because he was trying to make some sort of point about the church, but because the door of the church was the community bulletin board, that's where he posted everything, you know. Announcements of who had just a baby; and you know, for sale one spinning wheel. I mean that's the kind of stuff he sticks on the door of the church, so it was completely natural. He ain't made a big deal of this as if he was trying to, you know, knock the church. He posted it on the door of the church because that's where he posts these kinds of things. Calling for debate, scholars to come out, and debate either side of the issue. And he posted it, by the way, in Latin, not German. This is not meant for ordinary people to come by and go whoa, look at what this Luther guy wrote. This is posted for scholarly debate. We think it was a student--a student who paid attention, who actually came out, read it, and translated it into German. And it got around the town. And people started talking about it 'cause the way these things are created, it was pretty obvious that this wasn't just about a debate, that this was an attack on the pope and an attack on the Roman church and that's how the whole thing really began. But it become mythologic now, it's the mythology of Luther. Here he is with his gigantic pen that stretches into all of society, scratching his 95 theses on the giant door of the church. You know, it becomes a mythology of history. It's kinda like we're talking about Columbus and how it becomes a mythology. It goes beyond what the person actually did. It becomes this big mythological thing. Same thing happened with Luther. He's shown as doing this to start a revolution. It becomes one for a number of reasons, and they don't all have anything to do with Luther. So, you got the details on your book. But I'm a little more interested about what happens in the real world based on what he does. Up in the right-hand corner there as you can see a map of kind of where he's from, the Holy Roman Emperor. What strikes you about that map in the upper right? That's the Holy Roman Emperor.

>> There are a lot of principalities.

>> There's an awfully lot of them, yes. There's a lot of principalities. The Holy Roman Empire, you can call it an empire, which makes it sound like a chunk of monolithic state, but it actually didn't run that way. It had a whole bunch of principalities. And the princes, they are all competing against each other. It can really broken up. There's no unity throughout the Holy Roman Empire, nothing, it's broken. So what happens is certain princes decided to support Luther, and certain princes decided to support the Roman Catholic Church. Now if you were a prince making this kind of decision, let's leave the religious heartfelt stuff out of it for just a moment, let's say your belief go no particular way, would it be more advantageous for you to go along with the Lutheran idea or would it be more advantageous for you to support the church?

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yeah. Or does it depend on the population? That's a good question for you for just kinda what's the population. What would be the advantages of supporting the Roman Catholic Church and going after somebody like Luther who's obviously a heretic? Yes?

>> You make him status quo.

>> Yeah you make him a status quo. If you're benefiting from the status quo and you're doing really well, okay that's good, you want to get rid of any troublemaker, okay. So you'd pick the catholic side. But are there advantages do you think to taking Luther's side and all?

>> Well the one thing if you--if you're smart, you can follow the Luther's beg, you sot of reject the [inaudible] of the pope.

>> Oh yeah, if you believe what's in your heart then choosing is not so difficult.

>> Well, yeah. I mean I can hear it if you choose to be a Lutheran principality, it means that you don't really have to listen to the call [inaudible].

>> Okay, so there's political advantage there, right, and that you no longer have to listen to the pope or deal with his--remember all that stuff, I mean how did popes punish kings and princes.

>> Excommunication.

>> Yeah closing churches, excommunication, [inaudible], you could get out from under the thumb of all that by following Luther. There's also another real big benefit of this. Yes?

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yeah, don't forget the tithes, guys. This is 10 percent of the GNP [phonetic], if you like, is gone to the pope. It's gone to the Catholic Church. And don't forget they hold a ton of land too, lots and lots of land, just think how much land you could grab back if you kick all of them out. They said, "We're not doing the Roman Catholic Church thing anymore, so the 10 percent tithes stay here and we take over all of your lands, you have to get out." There is advantage of both ways here, you know. Stability for the more conservative who might stick with the church as it goes. Maybe they're tied in political bishops, you know, people they've appointed, that kind of thing which has come back as all the rage of pointing your own bishop has been quite the thing. So maybe politically it's better for you to stay with the catholic but not always, and the money thing, and the getting out from under thumb, the Catholic Church does it good. So these guys up here, they're confused. Some of them have conversion experience and seriously believed that they need to follow Luther and read his new bible. But others do it for political reasons, practical reasons, et cetera, and then they all fight each other because they've got a really good reason to go to war, right, with everybody else. Because the other side is obviously heretical, they've become the new infidel, whichever sides you're on, the other one is wrong. A good reason, a good reason for warfare, there'd be lots of warfare in the next chapter. Eventually this becomes a proximate divisions by only 1550, I mean we're still within a generation here. You've got unadoptive Roman Catholic and the thoughts of Calvinism in the most green areas near the top all of Germany and up into Scandinavia on Luther, so it divide everybody up. You also get a real serious social and political threat from all these stuff. When Luther talks about faith alone, he talks about reading the bible for yourself, that in order to encourage that faith and understand it, you should read the bible. Well most people couldn't read the Latin Vulgate Bible because it was in the Latin. So going back to the Greek bible, like a good humanist, Luther translated it into German and got it published.

>> Now by this time the printing press is in both ways. But it is still very expensive, by the printing press, he can borrow the more available. Now he publishes a German Bible. And as Protestants start to convert either to his form of Protestantism or other forms like Calvin, they also translate the Bible, usually from the Greek text rather than from the Latin text of the Roman Church, and they encouraged everybody to read it for themselves. And so, these Slavian peasants out in the middle of nowhere, in the Holy Roman Empire read it for themselves, and they come to the conclusion they're living under certain like conditions where they are in Slavia. They come to the conclusion that this all means they should be free, free from all their debts, they should be free from paying taxes. So, all this means that they are their own believers and they should have their own way. So this is when they--they set out 12 articles on a piece of paper and they published it, they sent it all round. This is one of them. It has been the custom hitherto for men to [inaudible] at their own property which is Medieval enough considering that Christ has delivered and redeemed us all without exemption by the shedding of His precious blood, the lowly as well as the great, they're lowly, right? Accordingly, it consists of with scripture that we should be free and wish to be so. Therefore we've read the Bible and we've decided that to preserve Christianity in this world, we should all be free. You think there might be a problem with it? Who's not gonna go along?

>> The aristocrat?

>> Well, the church itself [inaudible] any of the aristocracy, any of the Lord. I mean what kind of precedent is this exactly? The peasant saying we're no longer bound, because I'm reading this and I'm thinking there was a typo on the document. That's for men to bond us, I think, as their own property. They're bound. They're tied to the land. The manner can be sold from one more to another and they're still there, they're part of the sale, you know, in a lot of respect. They wanna be free. They, of course, come running to Luther with this, "Can we do good?" And Luther said, "I don't know you, I've nothing to do with you. You have gotten the entire wrong idea here, I'll support any efforts to eradicate you." Kind of a similar reaction actually is that Luther himself got from Sir Thomas More and Erasmus, he went running to Erasmus after the creation of the Protestant church saying, "Didn't I do good? I've got the real Christianity going here. Isn't that what all you Christian humanists are all about?" And Erasmus says, "I don't know you, I have nothing to do with you. You've got completely the wrong thing. I was talking about reforming the Roman Church, not leaving it." So there is such a thing as going too far. From More's point of view and Erasmus' point of view, especially, Luther went too far. From Luther's point of view, the Slavian peasant go too far.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yeah, I don't--I don't think it give the wrong impression at all to say that Luther kinda ended up on this political bandwagon that he didn't intend to be on, and that he got kinda railroaded into creating a new religion. I got no problem with that interpretation. I am not sure he intended it. But hadn't had it happened, you know, he can look at the Slavian peasants and say, "Whoa, you're going way too far with that." This is [inaudible].

[ Pause ]

>> Now you have seen here. Okay, this is [inaudible]. I've got another chart for you and discussion. It doesn't just say Lutheran, right? I mean we don't just have the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Protestant Church and that's it, and it freezes. What happens?

[ Pause ]

[ Inaudible Remarks ]

>> You get a whole bunch of them, right? A whole bunch of Protestant Church, it's not just one. A whole bunch of different sects, if you like. Some people call them different religions, I think that's going a little farther off from Christianity. On the other hand, Catholicism is supposed to be Christianity too, and most Protestant Christians refuse to call Catholics Christians. Isn't that interesting? [Inaudible]. Linguism [phonetic], Calvinism, and the Baptism. Why? Why so many? Why couldn't everybody just go along with Luther's salvation by faith alone and have their own bible there and their own language and be done.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Because they have different ideas.

>> Where did they get those ideas from? [Inaudible] both have different ideas under the Catholic Church, why would you have different ideas under the Lutheran Church? He doesn't want you having different ideas.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> And where did they get them?

>> From the bible.

>> The Bible.

>> The scriptures.

>> The Scriptures, yes. Because you see what's different here. In Catholicism, you don't read the bible for yourself, the Latin Vulgate Bible was usually read. It was read and understood by those priests and bishops who were supposed to understand it and interpret it for you. You got into it your stories of the lives of the saints, for example. The Latin Bible would not have been read by ordinary people. But the whole idea of translating these into the vernacular languages and having a bible in German and a bible in French, and a bible in English, the whole idea of that is so people could read it for themselves. And if you get a bunch of people reading the same text, do they all come out with the same vision, the same ideas of what it means?

>> No.

>> Absolutely not.

>> There's individualism in the Renaissance.

>> There's individualism in the Renaissance combined with the greater availability of printed material because of the printing press. We can blame Wittenberg for that, combined with the Protestant idea that everybody ought to read, each believer had to have contact with the word themselves. All of these kinda combine to create different Protestant sects all over the place. Each one believing that they've got the right way to do things and that all the others are wrong. Okay. Let me give you an example of that. That does include what we've already gone in for the discussion for next weekend. I have plenty of chart ssimilar to this, but this one is even simpler. That runs [inaudible] huge chart of differences between Protestant sects. This one is small, but it give you an idea what the differences are; where they kinda split.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yes, they are going to hell.

>> I mean, the Protestant thing, you know. I mean I don't know [inaudible].

>> It certainly is [inaudible]. Right. Yeah, definitely. You have dual aspects here, there are people who believe that if you don't worship the exact form of Christianity that their Church practices, you are going to hell.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> I'm not sure. We are having--currently having a resurgence in religious practice that does not appear to be [inaudible] in religious analysis. So I'm thinking that whatever number is, it's probably increasing. So take a look at this. You've got Catholics in the first column, the Protestant in the first column, then Lutheranism, Calvinism and the Baptists, I just take the first 3 that happened and that your book covers the best. And you can see the differences. Now salvation we've already talked about, right? Catholicism is based on good works and all the others are faith alone. He has free will. In Catholicism yet, he has the free will to be good, to be a good person, and do good work. In Lutheranism, you don't have free will. You are born, again he's going to the scripture, and saying that since Adam and Eve got thrown out of the garden, we are all born bad. We are born sinful. We're born depraved and we have to spend our lives digging our way out of that. Faith is given by God to insure that would happen. According to Calvin, no we don't have free will because everything is predestined. If God knows everything, right, isn't that a basic premise or a definition of God?

>> Yeah.

>> Right. God knows everything. That God already knows what you're on your exam, right? Okay. So according to the Calvinist, there's nothing you can do about it. God already knows whether you are going to heaven or hell, already.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yes.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> No.

[ Inaudible Remark]

>> Right.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Right.

>> So that was their concern. Every time they [inaudible] with that thing [inaudible].

>> Right.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> But the distinction we make here is that what Luther was doing, when he was asked about predestination, he was unable to answer the question, "Then why should we be good?" And if you look at his writings, he never really answered that very well. What Calvin did was called double predestination and he was able to answer you doing good things because you are looking for signs in your life that you are safe. So, there is a distinct, maybe it's just a maturation of an idea, you know, between Luther and Calvin. Maybe it's just some time and some thought in Calvin's legalist mind that that got a handle on what predestination could be. But yeah, Luther did, did believe. [Inaudible] essentially said that, right? Otherwise, you do good work. You have to do good work to be safe. But if you're predestined anyway, you don't have to do good work to be saved.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yeah, Calvin thinks that way, Calvin is a legal mind. In a different century, it would have been fun to see him go up against, and this is a third--another great legal mind. Take a look at this sacrament, particularly the bread and wine, because this is the big ceremonial thing that if you walk into a church during a ceremony, you can tell where you are right away. In Catholicism, the priest holds up the glass of wine and the wafer or bread and blesses it. And when he blesses it, if you are a believer, what happens is that bread and wine transforms into the body and blood of Jesus. And then depending on the church, either the congregation partakes of that or the priest partakes of that. But the transformation is real. It's actual. This is something non-Catholics have trouble getting their head around. It's an actual transformation. It's called transubstantiation. It means this substance transforms, it actually physically changes. If you don't believe it, you're not being a good Catholic. That's the purpose of the mass is to bring God's grace through the priest into the substance that he's holding in his hand. Now Luther said, the priest does not have that kind of magical power. The two things, the body and blood of Christ and the bread and the wine exist at the same time. In other words, the ceremony is still important. It still happens, but it doesn't transform the substance because the priest does not have a magical connection to God. All believers have a connection to God. So he is not doing any tricks up there, like that. By the time he gets to Calvinism, that particular ceremony has become a commemoration, it's representational, it's just wine, it's just bread, but it represents the body and blood of Christ. The Anabaptist do that too except only adults can partake and no children can [inaudible]. So you're seeing how this idea is very different between the Protestants and the Catholics, those Protestants and so there are differences among those groups. And yes, that would cause a fight. You know, what's the meaning of the service would cause a fight between a Lutheran and a Calvinist. That's to what--what was actually going on there. Baptism is kind of interesting. This is where the Anabaptist kind of jump off to this end and say, if you don't have a full understanding of the scripture, you can't be a Christian. Therefore, you do not baptize children. Why would that be a social threat? The Anabaptist are social threat all the way down the line. How would that particular aspect be a threat? Well--

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> That's a threat to the parents, right, 'cause this child might die, so that's the threat there, bigger social threat.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Okay. They're choosing, what's the problem with that? Can't they choose their religion?

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> As the result, right? But that all of these people who are transferring religions in 1517 are adult. They're driving their kids along. What does it mean to baptize an infant? What do you say in there?

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yeah, you can forget [inaudible]. But you're also--

>> You're making them appreciate or you're eventually [inaudible] branding while you're sort of pulling them into your religious walk.

>> I like branding, I like walk, yeah. You're making them part of the herd, okay?

>> Right.

>> You're bringing them into the community, the Christian community, you're bringing them in. They can never get out. They're brought in as babies. Why don't the Anabaptist like that?

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yeah, they didn't make the decision themselves. They didn't make a constant decision to join the group, and they believe that an individual have to contemplate itself to join the church and you can't do that till you're an adult. You can see under government how these things play out in the real world, what society is like, whether society can be reformed or not reformed. Who are the leaders of society, how much do you have to be educated? What's the role of church you see? All of these things differ depending on your religions belief. I need to show you this because I know that this can get kind of esoterically religious and it seems like this shouldn't matter in history, and yet it matters all through this chapter and all through the next chapter when the religious war starts that these have impact beyond that of the individual believer. We're still in a medieval communitarian world in a lot of ways here, not the individualistic world we live in now. And these issues are not only important to individuals, they're important to different [inaudible], they're important to state, they're important issues that will lead to war, major war throughout Europe for a very long time. So that there maybe a--

[ Pause ]

>> The English reformation is bizarre because unlike Lutheranism and Calvinism, it doesn't happen because of a theological difference that--like you see on your chart. It doesn't happen because of any of those things. It's completely political, it's completely on its own. And it's completely because of Henry, Henry VIII, the king of England and what he wanted for his state. I was below--I'm sure you know when I typed out this, this knowledge effect and I'm typing the word Anglican up here, which is the Church of England, and I type Protestant and then I erased it and then I typed it again and then I erased it again and I typed it again and left it there, and I'm still not sure. And to say that exactly because Protestant, given all these other sects in times that there was a deliberate theological break--There isn't, it's a political break.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Yeah, I know.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> But he used it. It wasn't--I don't--I don't see it as internalized. I don't see this is a change of heart. I see this as an argument. He's able to use argument given his political understanding from the scripture to argue against the pope who will not let him divorce Catherine. So Catherine, these wives are in order, these are all his wives up here. Catherine of Aragon is his first wife. She is the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, their most Catholic majesties. So what religion do you figure she is?

>> Catholic.

>> Obviously, alright. He marries her. She was his brother's wife. His brother was supposed to be king, and his brother died after he married her. She's older than he is. He's worried not just because his brother died and left him king and he wasn't expecting that, but because his father was the one who ended the Wars of the Roses and finally brought England some stability so the lords would all stop fighting each other. They had peace for the first time in a very long time and he didn't wanna lose it. So he want to make sure he has an heir to the throne so after he died there will be somebody strong ruling, and that man, a guy. He married Catherine of Aragon and he had a child, Mary. That's a girl. He doesn't want a girl. He tries again. Unfortunately, Catherine is aging and she hits menopause before she can get pregnant again. So not only is she not gonna give birth to a guy, she's not gonna give birth to any more children at all. And it's at this point that he contemplates a second wife. But there is no second wife unless the pope grants you an annulment and you can only annul a marriage if you haven't consummated it. Has Henry consummated this marriage?

>> Yeah.

>> Yes. How do we know?

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> There's a child, okay. So the argument that his marriage should be annulled hits the problem right away.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Well that's the other concern, and that's certainly Catherine's major concern in this argument.

>> So, Henry goes to the pope and says, "Well, here's the thing," using his scripture he says, "thou shall not marry thy brother's wife, you know, essentially and it says here in the scripture that--that you shouldn't do this. I did this and God is punishing me. I'm not getting a male heir, pretty obvious that I have angered God. Therefore, this marriage should be annulled on spiritual grounds." Well, the pope he's dealing with, Clement, is the same pope who's having to deal with [inaudible] and Martin Luther and he doesn't wanna hear it. He just really doesn't wanna hear it and he tells him, "Forget it, no way." Henry decides then to break from the Catholic church and create the Church of England, again, not using any theological argument necessarily, except his own personal problem here. He gets parliaments to agree to the break which wasn't too difficult because parliament is full of landholders. He would love to have more lands that he would then grab from the Roman church and give to them. So a deal is made and parliament agrees to the Act of Supremacy, as you read in your text, making him the head of the English church. This is not a Protestant church. This is the English church, which at this point still pretty much looks like the Catholic Church. The difference is the king at the head of the church. He then grants himself an annulment and married Anne Boleyn. Anne Boleyn was nice and young and had many childbearing years ahead of her. He had a child with her, Elizabeth. Now, he's got two cute little girls. It's not what he wants.

>> And then he can marry also [inaudible]?

>> Yeah. Well, she's Catholic and she's a bastard child at this point as far as he's concerned. Yeah. Elizabeth, great kid but still a girl. Anne Boleyn gets involved with all sorts of conspiracies. He determines that she has committed treason against him and he executes her. That's easier than annulment, right, if you wanna move on.

>> Do he really believe that Anne Boleyn is thinking of their relationship?

>> The sexual thing was not as much of concern to him. It was of concern in terms of fatherhood, right? That's a big deal, especially with him, but it was a political threat because you can't have the lord gathering around anybody to try to threaten his power. That's gonna destroy his job before it's even done. Instead, he married Jane Seymour who was Anne's maid, finally gets his son, Edward. Unfortunately, the son is a sickly little kid. They didn't know if he was gonna live and he got sick when he was a child and he was obviously very weak but--there you are. I believe Jane Seymour died on her own--

>> Childbirth.

>> --in childbirth giving birth to Edward, so there's not gonna be anymore after him unless he gets married again. He marries Anne of Cleves. I think Anne of Cleves was the one where he--I guess I'm confused now and then. I think Anne of Cleves was the one where he saw her picture in miniature and said, "Oh, she's lovely," and the artist had seriously flattered her. And as soon as he saw her--you know, they got married by proxy overseas 'cause she lives in the Netherlands, and as soon as he saw her, he didn't want to have anything to do with her, granted him self another divorce in this [inaudible]. The main thing of course is the kid. Edward will be the heir so Edward is next. Edward, is he Protestant or Catholic? Is he Anglican or Roman Catholic? What? He has to be Anglican not because he is a child of Henry, but because he is the child of Henry's third wife which he could only marry if you believe that he's annulled. I think Catherine never accepted that her marriage was annulled. Neither did any Catholic. He had to go along with it. This is how Sir Thomas More was executed. If he wouldn't go along, Sir Thomas More, in addition to being the great Christian humanist was a friend of Henry and Henry named him chancellor of England. And then when he decided to break from the church, was unable to convince More to go along with it. Because More was a good Catholic, one of the people who didn't believe that Luther should have been able to do what he did, who was trying to reform the church from within and he would not go along with the Act of Supremacy. So in order to state his plans, Henry VIII had him beheaded. So this is a big deal, you know, who accepts and who didn't accept the marriage. Thomas More said, "As far as I'm concerned, your holy marriage is to Catherine of Aragon." Unacceptable. Edward dies at 15 years old, it's very unfortunate. He had around him a whole Protestant group that was theologically with the Protestant program that wanted real Protestantism to come to England and persecuted catholic while Edward was in charge, so he's not really in charge. I mean he's rather young. He dies, there is an argument and some actual physical battle before Mary takes over as queen. Now, she is what?

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> She's Catholic. Bloody Mary she's called because she persecutes the Protestants including all of Edward's advisers. They all go to the chopping block. Mary only ruled for 5 years. What she wants, her father's child more than anything else, is a baby. She married Philip II of Spain, his most Catholic majesty. She rarely every sees him. Apparently, she's very much in love with him and he didn't care much about her. He wanted England. She had ovarian cancer. She kept thinking she was pregnant. She wasn't. She was ill and she died. So she's only in charge for 5 years, and then the only child left is Elizabeth who becomes Elizabeth I of the Elizabethan age, Shakespeare and all that who ruled for a very long time. And although she is Protestant, because she has to be, she's gotta be protestant. She was theologically wanted to balance things out and prevent the violence and persecutions that had gone on. So, whenever possible, she tried to kinda keep the church and Catholic ceremonies to keep the Catholics happy and then stay in charge of the church herself and make a few adaptations to make the Protestants happy. She walked a very fine line. She said the nation of England--and this is what, in fourth year. The nation of England is more important than Catholic or Protestant. That--isn't that Machiavelli? Really, right? The state is more important than the principle of the thing. The state is more important than what your belief is about God. The state is the most important thing. She is the first modern ruler that we think. That is she's not willing to put people in jail, but only if they politically are threatening her control. The Catholic Church has its own reformation, and that Catherine did really well with this and pointed out all the things I was gonna point anyway. So I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on it. Couple of points [inaudible]. The first one, they latched on to--they have an understanding that however wonderful Protestantism may be, however appealing it may be for people to read the bible for themselves, it has the potential to be very cold. It can be just kinda you and your book trying to figure out all the mysteries of the universe. They take the mysticism which we saw in the late middle ages, and they build it into something that makes believers, some of whom were doubting come back to the Catholic Church. Saint Teresa of Avila is the symbol your book uses, the symbol that I use because she had an emotional relationship as a mystic with God. If you read her whole work, it sounds very sexual, the contact that she had with God and with God's angel. It was real to her in a sense such as reading a book, you know, wouldn't be real. And Bernini has captured it in the sculpture. Baroque art in general is very much like Hellenistic art, full of motion and emotion. It was designed to provide a visual source for connecting with God when all the Protestants were running around using textual sources to get in touch with God. Not everybody is literate, right? The Protestants, Protestantism pretty much demanded that you be literate to join the club. So the Catholics take the view that all of these could be done visually.

>> An emotional connection with God could be attained in a much higher spiritual sense, and you don't have to read it, the bible for yourself, and it is done very effectively with Baroque art, and Baroque uses all of which in design to appeal to the emotion and bring you closer to God. Sort of harking back, remember the medieval cathedrals that make you soar up, that kind of thing. They're trying to get that back. It's been lost in the Renaissance, all the human sides, everything. Maybe ones relationship with God shouldn't be human side, and the Catholic Church uses that very effectively. But, they also need to go after what's obviously perfect, and these are the techniques they use. The Jesuit, the Society of Jesus, I hope you marked them as Catholic on that [inaudible]. Because they are considered to be the Catholic [inaudible] truth, the people who go out there and fight heresy and introduce Catholicism around the world. They're the ones who come to the Americas and make conversions. They're the ones who go to China and make conversion to Roman Christianity. They're the ones who meditate on death until they don't fear it anymore and then go out in the world and faith, you know, pagan empire.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Jesuits are Roman Catholic. Their view is based on Ignatius Loyola, their founder, are much stricter in terms of the theology and much less flexible than standard Roman Catholicism. So, there is some difference, but the schools have evolved through the 19th and 20th centuries and as a result, the difference is they're more school based than sect based, okay. And the principle, the theology is exactly the same. And then the other things they did, of course, the Council of Trent which means, you know, member, Mark Luther is here, 1517. 1545 sets the theology down of what is and what isn't, answers all of the Protestant objection, very much in the tradition of Saint Thomas Aquinas, in my opinion. The index of prohibited books lets good Catholics know what they shouldn't read, what's not okay. What would be on there for example?

>> The 95 Theses.

>> The 95--anything by Martin Luther, anything by John Calvin, anything by anybody who gets anywhere near an Anabaptist, the prohibited book. That index was still around for about 30 years ago. And then of course you've got the Papal Inquisition, still working like it did in the Middle Ages, only stronger, to try to make sure that heresy doesn't emerge in Catholic [inaudible]. They do a lot. They do a lot.

==== Transcribed by Automatic Sync Technologies ====