Let me turn to another Bergoglian outrage to which not enough Catholic commentators are paying attention... The writer of this article
provides an example of a service that Catholic bloggers and websites could do - in preparation for the seemingly worldwide apotheosis
of Martin Luther that many Catholics, starting with our beloved best-pope-EVUH!, are set to carry out during the yearlong 'jubilee'
marking the fifth centenary of his schism from the Church.
As I said, I never really bothered to read about Martin Luther because I did not think he - or any other non-Catholic Christian - would
have anything good to tell me that I have not already learned from the Church, or can learn from her if I must.
But what is being disclosed, for wider public consumption - though in bits and pieces so far - about Luther, his teachings and his life,
have been so appalling one wonders why Catholic writers have not been more outraged. Of course, he must have had his virtues, but
whatever they were certainly do not justify his schism (or all the anti-Catholic positions he took) in any way.
Imagine if a reasonably well-read, knowledgeable and blogger (who should be a diligent researcher as well) could dedicate the next
several months till October 1918, using abundant documentary evidence, to disclose exactly all the ways in which Luther was truly
an enemy of the Catholic faith, and why it is unconscionable that the nominal spiritual leader of Roman Catholicism should be spear-
heading a 'celebration' of Luther over the next fourteen months...
Luther, 'the Macchiavelli of religion'
by Francesco Agnoli
Translated from
August 18, 2016
On the occasion of the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther's schism, a confrontation among present German cardinals has been going on for some time.
On the one hand, Cardinals Kasper and Marx who unabashedly proclaim their admiration for Luther, and on the other hand, Cardinals Muller, Brandmueller and Cordes, who take the traditional Catholic line and see in Luther a man who 'deformed' the Gospel and broke the Church apart, dividing not just Christianity
[yet again - since the Orthodox did that first in the Great Schism of 1054] but Europe as well.
But this is not just about another 'high profile' theological debate. It has implications for natural law and on the way that Christian matrimony is perceived.
Kasper and Marx have been seeking, since Benedict XVI's resignation, to minimize condemnation of adultery and to legitimize, more or less openly, second marriages, providing thus an opening as well to same-sex 'marriage'. So what does Luther have to do with all this?
Perhaps much more than one might think. First of all, in the matter of doctrine, because Luther denies the sacramental character of matrimony and he places it under secular jurisdiction, i.e., under the power of the state. This clearly desacralizes matrimony and deprives it of its traditional supernatural significance
[i.e., God himself instituted marriage]
In objective fact, the first thing to recall is that Luther married an ex-Cistercian nun, Katherina von Bora, with whom he had six children. The couple resided in the former Augustinian convent of Wittenberg which was given to them by the Prince-Elector of Saxony (who, in turn, owed Luther the fact that he became the proprietor of all the assets of the Catholic Church in his principality).
Luther and Caterina became the model after whose example the Protestants "did everything they could on every occasion, often as organized committees, to force away religious women from their cloisters so as to marry them".
After the abduction of some women religious which took place on the evening of Holy Saturday in 1523, Luther called the undertaking "a happy robbery" and the perpetrators rejoiced with him that they had "liberated these poor souls from prison"
(see Jacques Maritain, I tre riformatori: Lutero, Cartesio, Rousseau (The three reformers: Luther, Descartes, Rousseau).
In those years, many German religious women were forced to leave their convents, usually against their will, to return to their homes or to get married.
The second fact to remember is this: Luther, in order not to lose the support of the Landgrave Phillip of Hesse - "one of the political pillars on which Lutheranism rested" - allowed him to take a second wife, Margarethe of Saal, although he already was married to Christina of Saxony with whom he had seven children.
It was 1539. Luther did not want any noisy scandals, nor did he really want to publicly justify bigamy, but he had to bend to the wishes of Phillip, an incorrigible libertine afflicted with syphilis, because it was "necessary to conserve the integrity of the Reformation's military power".
So he decided to act stealthily: Hoping that no one would learn about it, he communicated secretly to Phillip that the 'supplementary' marriage could be considered 'a necessity of conscience'. In other words, bigamy was OK as long as it is not made public.
Luther and Phillip Melancthon
[Luther's longtime friend, eventual theologian who would 'systematize' Luther's thought [Luther's Mons. Victor Fernandez!], and spokesman for the Reformation after Luther's death]: "If therefore Your Highness has definitely decided on taking a second wife, it is our opinion that this should remain secret".
After Phillip did marry his second wife, Phillip sent Luther - who had by then become quite addicted to good food and strong drinks - "a bottle of wine, which arrived in Wittenberg after the secret of the bigamy had leaked out through a sister of Phillip.
Feeling that he was in trouble, Luther - whom Tommaso Campanella called 'the Macchiavelli of the faith" - advised Phillip to declare publicly that Margarethe was not his legitimate wife, "replacing the marriage document with another notarial document declaring Margarete was only his concubine".
Phillip refused and demanded that Luther publicly confirm he himself had granted Phillip the dispensation for the second marriage. But Luther - who, on other occasions, did not hesitate to propose spurious translations of Biblical passages, answered that his advice was given secretly, and "now it has become null and void because it has been made public"
(Federico A. Rossi di Marignano, Martin Lutero e Caterina von Bora, Ancora, Milano, 2013, p. 343-347; Angela Pellicciari, Martin Lutero, Cantagalli, Siena, 2013, p. 109-113).
A few years earlier, in 1531, Luther, in one of his countless letters seeking the favor of powerful people, had written to Henry VIII of England that yes, marriage was indissoluble but... if the queen agreed, he could take a second wife, as in the Old Testament.
As we know, Henry VIII sought a dispensation not from Luther but from the pope in Rome, and not obtaining it, he seized the opportunity and proclaimed his schism from Rome
[thus the birth of Anglicanism], ultimately having as many as six wives married 'in conscience' (some of whom he ordered killed).
Luther's 'revolution' on matrimony gave him the pretext to cast off his monk's habit and to allow princes to repudiate their legitimate consorts and live in polygamy. But even in matters of doctrine, everything was destined to change gradually.
One must always keep this in mind: Luther always looked at the German nobility as his principal interlocutors whom he needed in order to wage his battle with Rome. And the German nobles, like those ion other European countries, were in a battle with the Church not only for reasons of politics and power, but on the very doctrine of matrimony. Often, the nobles rejected the principle of indissolubility nor the other rules on marriage set by Rome (like forbidding mixed marriages or marriages within a certain degree of consanguinity).
Moreover, for reasons related to their social or hereditary status, the nobles demanded the right to approve or disapprove a marriage, but the Church reserves this right to the partners themselves to decide whether they wish to marry each other. So how did Luther and his church respond to these exigencies by their protectors? By criticizing that marriage could be 'absolutely' indissoluble.
Luther therefore recognized at least four causes for divorce: adultery; impotence occurring during the marriage (impotence before the marriage would be a cause for nullification, as it is in the Church); 'malicious desertion'; and tenacious refusal by the wife to have conjugal relations (Luther would write of this fourth cause:
"If the wife neglects her conjugal duty, the civil authorities should compel her, or put her to death".][Oh, Martin Mohammed Luther!]
It was inevitable that Luther's leniencies would generate further assaults on the institution of marriage. Like that of the Anabaptists who approve of polygamy, or Luther's own disciple Butzer, according to whom Jesus never abolished the Mosaic practice of repudiating a spouse (effectively divorcing her), and that it was up to civilian authority to rule on divorce, without limitations or conditions.
Luther and others after him also insisted, with diverse emphases, on the importance of parental consent to marriage
[even if their children are adult and can and should decide for themselves???], reproaching the Church for minimizing its importance, and fought against any impediments due to consanguinity.
(Jean Gaudemet, Il matrimonio in Occidente, Sei, Torino, 1996, p. 207-2012).
The Catholic Church, at the Council of Trent, examined Luther's positions on marriage and reiterated once again the sacramental character of marriage and its indissolubility, rejecting the legitimacy of Lutheran divorce, reiterating (despite pressures from the French nobility) that parental consent was not binding, and condemning
Luther's assumption that it is 'impossible' to live chastely. [So what did he do while he was an Augustinian monk??? Of course, in this, he is echoed today by the likes of Kasper and Marx (and in his own way, JMB) - for whom living by the Gospel is now no more than an 'ideal'.]
The positions taken by the Council of Trent would be reiterated by the Church and her popes for the next 500 years, without any changes.
[Obviously, the church of Bergoglio is not just post-Vat2-conciliar, but even more so, post-Trent!][Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 19/08/2016 03:21]