Here is an “Introduction to Indulgences” from www.catholic.org – the “fact driven, faith informed” pro-catholic website. After the introduction you will read “Myths About Indulgences” from www.catholic.com – These are both Catholic websites and gives the current state of affairs and apologetics from a Catholic standpoint.

It is self explanatory and deserves no additional comment from myself. Except to say “OH MY GOD THEY STILL DO THIS CRAP?”

BUT FIRST
An Example of a Modern Catholic Indulgence
From http://catholickermit.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/pope-lourdes-grotto-plenary-indulgence/

Since my home parish of St Bernadette Catholic Church has a grotto dedicated to Our Lady of Lourdes, visiting and praying at the grotto between Feb 2-11, 2008 qualifies for a special Papal plenary indulgence to encourage renewed holiness, celebrating the 150th anniversary of the appearance of Mary to St Bernadette Soubirous near Lourdes, France.

Our Lady of Lourdes grotto @ St Bernadette Catholic Church, Hollywood, FloridaAn indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment (in this world and in purgatory) due for sins committed. A plenary indulgence is the remission of all punishment.  This is a tremendous gift from the Pope.  To receive the indulgence, one should say the Our Father, Apostleâ€s Creed and the Hail Mary at the grotto along with a prayer for our Popeâ€s intentions and go to confession before Easter Sunday.Our Lady of Lourdes grotto @ St Bernadette Catholic Church, Hollywood, Florida

For more info & details, see article at Catholic News Service (CNS).

Thank you Jesus for your mercy and the Holy Catholic Church you have left us … with the treasury of your merits.  May Our Lady continue to lead us to her Son, Jesus!  Amen.

INTRODUCTION TO INDULGENCES

You don’t hear about indulgences anymore, at least not in Catholic circles. If it could be said that at one time they were over emphasized, it’s surely true that today they’re under-emphasized. Many Catholic simply don’t know what indulgences are, and they’re at a loss to explain the Church’s position on indulgences when challenged by fundamentalists.

And fundamentalists do bring up indulgences, perhaps because they know even less about them than the average, poorly-informed Catholic.

There is surely no better place to turn than to the Enchiridion of Indulgences. “Enchiridion” means “handbook,” and the Enchiridion of Indulgences is the Church’s official handbook on what acts and prayers carry indulgences and what indulgences actually are.

An indulgences is defined as “the remission before God of the temporal punishment due for sins already forgiven as far as their guilt is concerned.” The first thing to note is that forgiveness of a sin is separate from punishment for the sin. Through sacramental confession we obtain forgiveness, but we aren’t let off the hook as far as punishment goes.

Indulgences are two kinds: partial and plenary. A partial indulgences removes part of the temporal punishment due for sins. A plenary indulgence removes all of it. This punishment may come either in this life, in the form of various sufferings, or in the next life, in purgatory. What we don’t get rid of here we suffer there.
TIME OFF FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR?

If you uncover a holy card or prayer book, you’ll notice pious acts or recitation of prayers might carry an indication of time, such as “300 days or “two years.” Most fundamentalists, and even many Catholics, think such phrases refer to how much “time off for good behavior” you’d get in purgatory. If you perform a pious act labeled as “300 days’ partial indulgence,” then you’d spend 300 fewer days in purgatory.

It’s easy to see how misinformed Catholics might scurry around for years, toting up indulgences, keeping a little register in which they add up the days. “Let’s see, last year’s tally comes to one thousand three hundred twelve years, give or take a week or so, and my lifetime tally is now past the twenty thousand mark. I can cancel out a lot of sinning with this!”

Or so some people might think. Well, there are no days or years in purgatory– or in heaven or hell, for that matter — and the indication of days or years attached to partial indulgences never meant you’d get that much time off in purgatory.
AS GOD SEES FIT

What it means was that you’d bet a partial indulgence commensurate with what the early Christians got for doing penances for a certain length of time. But there has never been any way for us to measure how much “good time” that represents. All the Church could say, and all it ever did say, was that your temporal punishment would be reduced — as God saw fit.

Since some Catholics were confused by the designation of days and years attached to partial indulgences, and since nearly all Protestants got a wrong idea of what those numbers meant, the rules for indulgences were modified in 1967, and now “the grant of a partial indulgence is designated only with the words “partial indulgence,” without any determination of days or years,” according to the Enchiridion.

To receive a partial indulgence, you have to recite the prayer or do the act of charity assigned. You have to be in the state of grace at least by the completion of the prescribed work. The rule says” at the completion” because often part of the prescribed work is going to confession, and you might not be in the state of grace before you do that. The other thing required is having a general intention to gain the indulgence. If you perform the required act but don’t want to gain the indulgence, obviously you won’t gain it.

The requirements for a plenary indulgence are tougher than for a partial. After all, a plenary indulgence remove all the temporal punishment due for the sins committed up to that time.

(If you sin later, of course, the temporal punishment connected with the new sins isn’t covered by the earlier plenary indulgence, but, at least the punishment for the old sins isn’t revived.)

“To acquire a plenary indulgence,” says the Enchiridion, “it is necessary to perform the work to which the indulgence is attached and to fulfill the following three conditions: sacramental confession, Eucharistic Communion, and prayer for the intention of the Sovereign Pontiff. It is further required that all attachment to sin, even venial sin, be absent.”

THE TOUGHEST REQUIREMENT

The greatest hurdle is the last. Making a good confession is not particularly difficult, and going to Communion and praying for the Pope’s intentions are easier still. It’s being free from all attachment to sin that’s hard and it’s quite possible that even evi-dently good people, who seek plenary indulgences regularly, never, in their whole lives, obtain one, because they are unwilling to relinquish their favorite little sins.

There is an account of St. Philip Neri, who died in 1595, preaching a jubilee indulgence in a crowed church. A revelation was given to him that only two people in the church were actually getting it, an old char-woman and the saint himself. Not exactly encouraging, huh? But don’t worry. If you aren’t perfectly disposed and can’t get the plenary indulgence. you’ll at least come away with a partial.

It should be pointed out that the first three conditions may be fulfilled several days before or after doing the prescribed work, through receiving Communion and praying for the Pope are usually done the same day the work is performed.

By the way, the standard prayers for the Pope are one Our Father and one Creed, though you’re at liberty to substitute other prayers.
VARIOUS GRANTS

The bulk of the Enchiridion is a listing of indulgenced prayers and acts. First come three “general grants.”

The first says “a partial indulgence is granted to the faithful who, in the performance of their duties and in bearing the trials of life, raise their mind with humble confidence to God, adding — even if only mentally– some pious invocation.” It is noted that this grant “is intended to serve as an incentive to the faithful to practice the commandment of Christ that `they must always pray and not lose heart'” (Luke 18:1)

The second general grant is this: “A partial indulgence is granted to the faithful who, in a spirit of faith and mercy, give of themselves or of their goods to serve their brothers in need.” This grant “is intended to serve as an incentive to the faithful to perform more frequent acts of charity and mercy,” as Christ commanded (John 13:15, Acts 10:38).

The third general grant provides that “a partial indulgence is granted to the faithful who, in a spirit of penance, voluntarily deprive them-selves of what is licit and pleasing to them.” This provision is meant “to move the faithful to bridle their passions and thus to bring to their bodies into subjection and to conform themselves to Christ in his poverty and suffering” (Matt 8:20, Matt 16:24).
PROVISIONS

After the discussion of the general grants comes a listing of miscellaneous prayers and acts to which indulgences are attached. This list is much shorter than in former years, the Church having decided to limit indulgences to the most important works.

There is no room or need to mention all the pious acts which are indulgenced, but it’s worth noting that a plenary indulgence is given for the recitation of the rosary in a church or family group (and not just the recitation, of course, but the fulfilling of the usual conditions for a plenary indulgence).

Likewise, first communicants and those who “assist at the sacred ceremonies of a First Communion — for example, the parents — can receive a plenary indulgence. And the same reward is given to those who, “with the veneration due the divine word, make a spiritual reading from Sacred Scripture” for at least half an hour. Even making the Sign of the Cross has a partial indulgence attached to it.

MYTHS ABOUT INDULGENCES

Indulgences. The very word stirs up more misconceptions than perhaps any other teaching in Catholic theology. Those who attack the Church for its use of indulgences rely upon—and take advantage of—the ignorance of both Catholics and non-Catholics.

What is an indulgence? The Church explains, “An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain defined conditions through the Churchâ€s help when, as a minister of redemption, she dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions won by Christ and the saints” (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1). To see the biblical foundations for indulgences, see the Catholic Answers tract A Primer on Indulgences.

Step number one in explaining indulgences is to know what they are. Step number two is to clarify what they are not. Here are the seven most common myths about indulgences:

Myth 1: A person can buy his way out of hell with indulgences.

This charge is without foundation. Since indulgences remit only temporal penalties, they cannot remit the eternal penalty of hell. Once a person is in hell, no amount of indulgences will ever change that fact. The only way to avoid hell is by appealing to Godâ€s eternal mercy while still alive. After death, oneâ€s eternal fate is set (Heb. 9:27).

Myth 2: A person can buy indulgences for sins not yet committed.

The Church has always taught that indulgences do not apply to sins not yet committed. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes, “[An indulgence] is not a permission to commit sin, nor a pardon of future sin; neither could be granted by any power.”

Myth 3: A person can “buy forgiveness” with indulgences.

The definition of indulgences presupposes that forgiveness has already taken place: “An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven” (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1, emphasis added). Indulgences in no way forgive sins. They deal only with punishments left after sins have been forgiven.

Myth 4: Indulgences were invented as a means for the Church to raise money.
Indulgences developed from reflection on the sacrament of reconciliation. They are a way of shortening the penance of sacramental discipline and were in use centuries before money-related problems appeared.

Myth 5: An indulgence will shorten your time in purgatory by a fixed number of days.

The number of days which used to be attached to indulgences were references to the period of penance one might undergo during life on earth. The Catholic Church does not claim to know anything about how long or short purgatory is in general, much less in a specific personâ€s case.

Myth 6: A person can buy indulgences.

The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, “in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions” (Catholic Encyclopedia). This act proved the Churchâ€s seriousness about removing abuses from indulgences.

Myth 7: A person used to be able to buy indulgences.

One never could “buy” indulgences. The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms—indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic Encyclopedia states: “[I]t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded.”

Being able to explain these seven myths will be a large step in helping others to understand indulgences. But, there are still questions to be asked:

“How many of oneâ€s temporal penalties can be remitted?”

Potentially, all of them. The Church recognizes that Christ and the saints are interested in helping penitents deal with the aftermath of their sins, as indicated by the fact they always pray for us (Heb. 7:25, Rev. 5:8). Fulfilling its role in the administration of temporal penalties, the Church draws upon the rich supply of rewards God chose to bestow on the saints, who pleased him, and on his Son, who pleased him most of all.

The rewards on which the Church draws are infinite because Christ is God, so the rewards he accrued are infinite and never can be exhausted. His rewards alone, apart from the saintsâ€, could remove all temporal penalties from everyone, everywhere. The rewards of the saints are added to Christâ€s—not because anything is lacking in his, but because it is fitting that they be united with his rewards as the saints are united with him. Although immense, their rewards are finite, but his are infinite.

“If the Church has the resources to wipe out everyoneâ€s temporal penalties, why doesnâ€t it do so?”

Because God does not wish this to be done. God himself instituted the pattern of temporal penalties being left behind. They fulfill valid functions, one of them disciplinary. If a child were never disciplined, he would never learn obedience. God disciplines us as his children — “the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives” (Heb. 12:6) — so some temporal penalties must remain.

The Church cannot wipe out, with a stroke of the pen, so to speak, everyoneâ€s temporal punishments because their remission depends on the dispositions of the persons who suffer those temporal punishments. Just as repentance and faith are needed for the remission of eternal penalties, so they are needed for the remission of temporal penalties. Pope Paul VI stated, “Indulgences cannot be gained without a sincere conversion of outlook and unity with God”(Indulgentarium Doctrina 11). We might say that the degree of remission depends on how well the penitent has learned his lesson.

“How does one determine by what amount penalties have been lessened?”

Before Vatican II each indulgence was said to remove a certain number of “days” from oneâ€s discipline—for instance, an act might gain “300 days†indulgence”—but the use of the term “days” confused people, giving them the mistaken impression that in purgatory time as we know it still exists and that we can calculate our “good time” in a mechanical way. The number of days associated with indulgences actually never meant that that much “time” would be taken off oneâ€s stay in purgatory. Instead, it meant that an indefinite but partial (not complete) amount of remission would be granted, proportionate to what ancient Christians would have received for performing that many days†penance. So, someone gaining 300 days†indulgence gained roughly what an early Christian would have gained by, say, reciting a particular prayer on arising for 300 days.

To overcome the confusion Paul VI issued a revision of the handbook (Enchiridion is the formal name) of indulgences. Today, numbers of days are not associated with indulgences. They are either plenary or partial.

“Whatâ€s the difference between a partial and a plenary indulgence?”

“An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin” (Indulgentarium Doctrina 2, 3). Only God knows exactly how efficacious any particular partial indulgence is or whether a plenary indulgence was received at all.

“Donâ€t indulgences duplicate or even negate the work of Christ?”

Despite the biblical underpinnings of indulgences, some are sharply critical of them and insist the doctrine supplants the work of Christ and turns us into our own saviors. This objection results from confusion about the nature of indulgences and about how Christâ€s work is applied to us.

Indulgences apply only to temporal penalties, not to eternal ones. The Bible indicates that these penalties may remain after a sin has been forgiven and that God lessens these penalties as rewards to those who have pleased him. Since the Bible indicates this, Christâ€s work cannot be said to have been supplanted by indulgences.

The merits of Christ, since they are infinite, comprise most of those in the treasury of merits. By applying these to believers, the Church acts as Christâ€s servant in the application of what he has done for us, and we know from Scripture that Christâ€s work is applied to us over time and not in one big lump (Phil. 2:12, 1 Pet. 1:9).

“Isnâ€t it better to put all of the emphasis on Christ alone?”

If we ignore the fact of indulgences, we neglect what Christ does through us, and we fail to recognize the value of what he has done in us. Paul used this very sort of language: “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christâ€s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church” (Col. 1:24).

Even though Christâ€s sufferings were superabundant (far more than needed to pay for anything), Paul spoke of completing what was “lacking” in Christâ€s sufferings. If this mode of speech was permissible for Paul, it is permissible for us, even though the Catholic language about indulgences is far less shocking than was Paulâ€s language about his own role in salvation.

Catholics should not be defensive about indulgences. They are based on principles straight from the Bible, and we can be confident not only that indulgences exist, but that they are useful and worth obtaining.

Pope Paul VI declared, “[T]he Church invites all its children to think over and weigh up in their minds as well as they can how the use of indulgences benefits their lives and all Christian society…. Supported by these truths, holy Mother Church again recommends the practice of indulgences to the faithful. It has been very dear to Christian people for many centuries as well as in our own day. Experience proves this” (Indulgentarium Doctrina, 9, 11).

HOW TO GAIN AN INDULGENCE

To gain any indulgence you must be a Catholic in a state of grace. You must be a Catholic in order to be under the Churchâ€s jurisdiction, and you must be in a state of grace because apart from Godâ€s grace none of your actions are fundamentally pleasing to God (meritorious). You also must have at least the habitual intention of gaining an indulgence by the act performed.

To gain a partial indulgence, you must perform with a contrite heart the act to which the indulgence is attached.

To gain a plenary indulgence you must perform the act with a contrite heart, plus you must go to confession (one confession may suffice for several plenary indulgences), receive Holy Communion, and pray for the popeâ€s intentions. (An Our Father and a Hail Mary said for the popeâ€s intentions are sufficient, although you are free to substitute other prayers of your own choice.) The final condition is that you must be free from all attachment to sin, including venial sin.

If you attempt to receive a plenary indulgence, but are unable to meet the last condition, a partial indulgence is received instead.

Below are indulgences listed in the Handbook of Indulgences (New York: Catholic Book Publishing, 1991). Note that there is an indulgence for Bible reading. So, rather than discouraging Bible reading, the Catholic Church promotes it by giving indulgences for it! (This was the case long before Vatican II.)

• An act of spiritual communion, expressed in any devout formula whatsoever, is endowed with a partial indulgence.

• A partial indulgence is granted the Christian faithful who devoutly spend time in mental prayer.

• A plenary indulgence is granted when the rosary is recited in a church or oratory or when it is recited in a family, a religious community, or a pious association. A partial indulgence is granted for its recitation in all other circumstances.

• A partial indulgence is granted the Christian faithful who read sacred Scripture with the veneration due Godâ€s word and as a form of spiritual reading. The indulgence will be a plenary one when such reading is done for at least one-half hour [provided the other conditions are met].

• A partial indulgence is granted to the Christian faithful who devoutly sign themselves with the cross while saying the customary formula: “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”

In summary, the practice of indulgences neither takes away nor adds to the work of Christ. It is his work, through his body the Church, raising up children in his own likeness. “The Christian who seeks to purify himself of his sin and to become holy with the help of Godâ€s grace is not alone. ‘The life of each of Godâ€s children is joined in Christ and through Christ in a wonderful way to the life of all the other Christian brethren in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ, as in a single mystical person— (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1474 [Indulgentarium Doctrina 5]).

NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

A simple quick read overview might be this excerpt:

“Therefore, Christian reader, thou wilt find in my earliest books and writings how many points of faith I then, with all humility, yielded and conceded to the pope, which since then I have held and condemned for the most horrible blasphemy and abomination, and which I would have to be so held and so condemned forever. Amen.”

Here is the letter in it’s original context, translated into English:

_Dr. Martin Luther to the Christian Reader_
by Dr. Martin Luther, 1545
Published in:
_Works of Martin Luther_
Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds.
(Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Vol. 1, pp. 10-11.

DR. MARTIN LUTHER TO THE CHRISTIAN READER

EDITION OF 1545

Above all things I beseech the Christian reader and beg him  for
the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ, to read my earliest books  very
circumspectly and with much pity, knowing that before now I  too
was a monk, and one of the right frantic and raving papists.  When
I took up this matter against Indulgences, I was so full and
drunken, yea, so besotted in papal doctrine that, out of my great
zeal, I would have been ready to do murder — at least, I would
have been glad to see and help that murder should be done — on
all who would not be obedient and subject to the pope, even to
his smallest word.

Such a Saul was I at that time; and I meant it right earnestly;
and there are still many such to-day. In a word, I was not such a
frozen and ice-cold champion of the papacy as Eck and others of
his kind have been and still are. They defend the Roman See more
for the sake of the shameful belly, which is their god, than
because they are really attached to its cause. Indeed I am wholly
of the opinion that like latter-day Epicureans, they only laugh at
the pope. But I verily espoused this cause in deepest earnest and
in all fidelity; the more so because I shrank from the Last Day
with great anxiety and fear and terror, and yet from the depths of
my heart desired to be saved.

Therefore, Christian reader, thou wilt find in my earliest books
and writings how many points of faith I then, with all humility,
yielded and conceded to the pope, which since then I have held and
condemned for the most horrible blasphemy and abomination, and
which I would have to be so held and so condemned forever. Amen.

Thou wilt therefore ascribe this my error, or as my opponents
venomously call it, this inconsistency of mine, to the time, and
to my ignorance and inexperience. At the beginning I was quite
alone and without any helpers, and moreover, to tell the truth,
unskilled in all these things, and far too unlearned to discuss
such high and weighty matters. For it was without any intention,
purpose, or will of mine that I fell, quite unexpectedly, into
this wrangling and contention.  This I take God, the Searcher of
hearts, to witness.

I tell these things to the end that, if thou shalt read my books,
thou mayest know and remember that I am one of those who, as St.
Augustine says of himself, have grown by writing and by teaching
others, and not one of those who, starting with nothing, have in a
trice become the most exalted and most learned doctors. We find,
alas! many of these self-grown doctors; who in truth are nothing,
do nothing and accomplish nothing, are moreover untried and
inexperienced, and yet, after a single look at the Scriptures,
think themselves able wholly to exhaust its spirit.

Farewell, dear reader, in the Lord. Pray that the Word may be
further spread abroad, and may be strong against the miserable
devil. For he is mighty and wicked, and just now is raving
everywhere and raging cruelly, like one who well knows and feels
that his time is short, and that the kingdom of his Vicar, the
Antichrist in Rome, is sore beset. But may the God of all grace
and mercy strengthen and complete in us the work He has begun, to
His honor and to the comfort of His little flock. Amen.

English text first, Latin text follows:

Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther
on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences
by Dr. Martin Luther (1517) Published in:
Works of Martin Luther:
Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds.
(Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Vol.1, pp. 29-38
_______________

Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God’s remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

20. Therefore by “full remission of all penalties” the pope means not actually “of all,” but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

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

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

34. For these “graces of pardon” concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter’s church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope’s wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The “treasures of the Church,” out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church’s poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ’s merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the “greatest graces” are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God — this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit: — “Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.”

83. Again: — “Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”

84. Again: — “What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul’s own need, free it for pure love’s sake?”

85. Again: — “Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?”

86. Again: — “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?”

87. Again: — “What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?”

88. Again: — “What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?”

89. “Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?”

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.

LATIN TEXT

“Disputatio pro Declaratione Virtutis Indulgentiarum.”
by Dr. Martin Luther, 1483-1546
D. MARTIN LUTHERS WERKE: KRITISCHE GESAMMTAUSGABE.
1. Band (Weimar: Hermann Boehlau, 1883). pp. 233-238.
PW #001-001La

Amore et studio elucidande veritatis hec subscripta disputabuntur
Wittenberge, Presidente R. P. Martino Lutther, Artium et S.
Theologie Magistro eiusdemque ibidem lectore Ordinario. Quare
petit, ut qui non possunt verbis presentes nobiscum disceptare
agant id literis absentes. In nomine domini nostri Hiesu Christi.
Amen.

1. Dominus et magister noster Iesus Christus dicendo `Penitentiam
agite &c.’ omnem vitam fidelium penitentiam esse voluit.

2. Quod verbum de penitentia sacramentali (id est confessionis et
satisfactionis, que sacerdotum ministerio celebratur) non potest
intelligi.

3. Non tamen solam intendit interiorem, immo interior nulla est,
nisi foris operetur varias carnis mortificationes.

4. Manet itaque pena, donec manet odium sui (id est penitentia
vera intus), scilicet usque ad introitum regni celorum.

5. Papa non vult nec potest ullas penas remittere preter eas, quas
arbitrio vel suo vel canonum imposuit.

6. Papa non potest remittere ullam culpam nisi declarando, et
approbando remissam a deo Aut certe remittendo casus reservatos
sibi, quibus contemptis culpa prorsus remaneret.

7. Nulli prorus remittit deus culpam, quin simul eum subiiciat
humiliatum in omnibus sacerdoti suo vicario.

8. Canones penitentiales solum viventibus sunt impositi nihilque
morituris secundum eosdem debet imponi.

9. Inde bene nobis facit spiritussanctus in papa excipiendo in
suis decretis semper articulum mortis et necessitatis.

10. Indocte et male faciunt sacerdotes ii, qui morituris
penitentias canonicas in purgatorium reservant.

11. Zizania illa de mutanda pena Canonica in penam purgatorii
videntur certe dormientibus episcopis seminata.

12. Olim pene canonice non post, sed ante absolutionem
imponebantur tanquam tentamenta vere contritionis.

13. Morituri per mortem omnia solvunt et legibus canonum mortui
iam sunt, habentes iure earum relaxationem.

14. Imperfecta sanitas seu charitas morituri necessario secum fert
magnum timorem, tantoque maiorem, quanto minor fuerit ipsa.

15. Hic timor et horror satis est se solo (ut alia taceam) facere
penam purgatorii, cum sit proximus desperationis horrori.

16. Videntur infernus, purgaturium, celum differre, sicut
desperatio, prope desperatio, securitas differunt.

17. Necessarium videtur animabus in purgatorio sicut minni
horrorem ita augeri charitatem.

18. Nec probatum videtur ullis aut rationibus aut scripturis, quod
sint extra statum meriti seu augende charitatis.

19. Nec hoc probatum esse videtur, quod sint de sua beatitudine
certe et secure, saltem omnes, licet nos certissimi simus.

20. Igitur papa per remissionem plenariam omnium penarum non
simpliciter omnium intelligit, sed a seipso tantummodo
impositarum.

21. Errant itaque indulgentiarum predicatores ii, qui dicunt per
pape indulgentias hominem ab omni pena solvi et salvari.

22. Quin nullam remittit animabus in purgatorio, quam in hac vita
debuissent secundum Canones solvere.

23. Si remissio ulla omnium omnino penarum potest alicui dari,
certum est eam non nisi perfectissimis, i.e. paucissimis, dari.

24. Falli ob id necesse est maiorem partem populi per
indifferentem illam et magnificam pene solute promissionem.

25. Qualem potestatem habet papa in purgatorium generaliter, talem
habet quilibet Episcopus et Curatus in sua diocesi et parochia
specialiter.

1. [26] Optime facit papa, quod non potestate clavis (quam nullam
habet) sed per modum suffragii dat animabus remissionem.

2. [27] Hominem predicant, qui statim ut iactus nummus in cistam
tinnierit evolare dicunt animam.

3. [28] Certum est, nummo in cistam tinniente augeri questum et
avariciam posse: suffragium autem ecclesie est in arbitrio dei
solius.

4. [29] Quis scit, si omnes anime in purgatorio velint redimi,
sicut de s. Severino et Paschali factum narratur.

5. [30] Nullus securus est de veritate sue contritionis,
multominus de consecutione plenarie remissionis.

6. [31] Quam rarus est vere penitens, tam rarus est vere
indulgentias redimens, i. e. rarissimus.

7. [32] Damnabuntur ineternum cum suis magistris, qui per literas
veniarum securos sese credunt de sua salute.

8. [33] Cavendi sunt nimis, qui dicunt venias illas Pape donum
esse illud dei inestimabile, quo reconciliatur homo deo.

9. [34] Gratie enim ille veniales tantum respiciunt penas
satisfactionis sacramentalis ab homine constitutas.

10. [35] Non christiana predicant, qui docent, quod redempturis
animas vel confessionalia non sit necessaria contritio.

11. [36] Quilibet christianus vere compunctus habet remissionem
plenariam a pena et culpa etiam sine literis veniarum sibi
debitam.

12. [37] Quilibet versus christianus, sive vivus sive mortuus,
habet participationem omnium bonorum Christi et Ecclesie etiam
sine literis veniarum a deo sibi datam.

13. [38] Remissio tamen et participatio Pape nullo modo est
contemnenda, quia (ut dixi) est declaratio remissionis divine.

14. [39] Difficillimum est etiam doctissimis Theologis simul
extollere veniarum largitatem et contritionis veritatem coram
populo.

15. [40] Contritionis veritas penas querit et amat, Veniarum autem
largitas relaxat et odisse facit, saltem occasione.

16. [41] Caute sunt venie apostolice predicande, ne populus false
intelligat eas preferri ceteris bonis operibus charitatis.

17. [42] Docendi sunt christiani, quod Pape mens non est,
redemptionem veniarum ulla ex parte comparandam esse operibus
misericordie.

18. [43] Docendi sunt christiani, quod dans pauperi aut mutuans
egenti melius facit quam si venias redimereet.

19. [44] Quia per opus charitatis crescit charitas et fit homo
melior, sed per venias non fit melior sed tantummodo a pena
liberior.

20. [45] Docendi sunt christiani, quod, qui videt egenum et
neglecto eo dat pro veniis, non idulgentias Pape sed indignationem
dei sibi vendicat.

21. [46] Docendi sunt christiani, quod nisi superfluis abundent
necessaria tenentur domui sue retinere et nequaquam propter venias
effundere.

22. [47] Docendi sunt christiani, quod redemptio veniarum est
libera, non precepta.

23. [48] Docendi sunt christiani, quod Papa sicut magis eget ita
magis optat in veniis dandis pro se devotam orationem quam
promptam pecuniam.

24. [49] Docendi sunt christiani, quod venie Pape sunt utiles, si
non in cas confidant, Sed nocentissime, si timorem dei per eas
amittant.

25. [50] Docendi sunt christiani, quod si Papa nosset exactiones
venialium predicatorum, mallet Basilicam s. Petri in cineres ire
quam edificari cute, carne et ossibus ovium suarum.

1. [51] Docendi sunt christiani, quod Papa sicut debet ita vellet,
etiam vendita (si opus sit) Basilicam s. Petri, de suis pecuniis
dare illis, a quorum plurimis quidam concionatores veniarum
pecuniam eliciunt.

2. [52] Vana est fiducia salutis per literas veniarum, etiam si
Commissarius, immo Papa ipse suam animam pro illis impigneraret.

3. [53] Hostes Christi et Pape sunt ii, qui propter venias
predicandas verbum dei in aliis ecclesiis penitus silere iubent.

4. [54] Iniuria fit verbo dei, dum in eodem sermone equale vel
longius tempus impenditur veniis quam illi.

5. [55] Mens Pape necessario est, quod, si venie (quod minimum
est) una campana, unis pompis et ceremoniis celebrantur,
Euangelium (quod maximum est) centum campanis, centum pompis,
centum ceremoniis predicetur.

6. [56] Thesauri ecclesie, unde Pape dat indulgentias, neque satis
nominati sunt neque cogniti apud populum Christi.

7. [57] Temporales certe non esse patet, quod non tam facile eos
profundunt, sed tantummodo colligunt multi  concionatorum.

8. [58] Nec sunt merita Christi et sanctorum, quia hec semper sine
Papa operantur gratiam hominis interioris et crucem, mortem
infernumque exterioris.

9. [59] Thesauros ecclesie s. Laurentius dixit esse pauperes
ecclesie, sed locutus est usu vocabuli suo tempore.

10. [60] Sine temeritate dicimus claves ecclesie (merito Christi
donatas) esse thesaurum istum.

11. [61] Clarum est enim, quod ad remissionem penarum et casuum
sola sufficit potestas Pape.

12. [62] Verus thesaurus ecclesie est sacrosanctum euangelium
glorie et gratie dei.

13. [63] Hic autem est merito odiosissimus, quia ex primis facit
novissimos.

14. [64] Thesaurus autem indulgentiarum merito est gratissimus,
quia ex novissimis facit primos.

15. [65] Igitur thesauri Euangelici rhetia sunt, quibus olim
piscabantur viros divitiarum.

16. [66] Thesauri indulgentiarum rhetia sunt, quibus nunc
piscantur divitias virorum.

17. [67] Indulgentie, quas concionatores vociferantur maximas
gratias, intelliguntur vere tales quoad questum promovendum.

18. [68] Sunt tamen re vera minime ad gratiam dei et crucis
pietatem comparate.

19. [69] Tenentur Episcopi et Curati veniarum apostolicarum
Commissarios cum omni reverentia admittere.

20. [70] Sed magis tenentur omnibus oculis intendere, omnibus
auribus advertere, ne pro commissione Pape sua illi somnia
predicent.

21. [71] Contra veniarum apostolicarum veritatem qui loquitur, sit
ille anathema et maledictus.

22. [72] Qui vero, contra libidinem ac licentiam verborum
Concionatoris veniarum curam agit, sit ille benedictus.

23. [73] Sicut Papa iuste fulminat eos, qui in fraudem negocii
veniarum quacunque arte machinantur,

24. [74] Multomagnis fulminare intendit eos, qui per veniarum
pretextum in fraudem sancte charitatis et veritatis machinantur,

25. [75] Opinari venias papales tantas esse, ut solvere possint
hominem, etiam si quis per impossibile dei genitricem violasset,
Est insanire.

1. [76] Dicimus contra, quod venie papales nec minimum venialium
peccatorum tollere possint quo ad culpam.

2. [77] Quod dicitur, nec si s. Petrus modo Papa esset maiores
gratias donare posset, est blasphemia in sanctum Petrum et Papam.

3. [78] Dicimus contra, quod etiam iste et quilibet papa maiores
habet, scilicet Euangelium, virtutes, gratias, curationum &c. ut
1. Co. XII.

4. [79] Dicere, Crucem armis papalibus insigniter erectam cruci
Christi equivalere, blasphemia est.

5. [80] Rationem reddent Episcopi, Curati et Theologi, Qui tales
sermones in populum licere sinunt.

6. [81] Facit hec licentiosa veniarum predicatio, ut nec
reverentiam Pape facile sit etiam doctis viris redimere a
calumniis aut certe argutis questionibus laicorm.

7. [82] Scilicet. Cur Papa non evacuat purgatorium propter
sanctissimam charitatem et summam animarum necessitatem ut causam
omnium iustissimam, Si infinitas animas redimit propter pecuniam
funestissimam ad structuram Basilice ut causam levissimam?

8. [83] Item. Cur permanent exequie et anniversaria defunctorum et
non reddit aut recipi permittit beneficia pro illis instituta, cum
iam sit iniuria pro redemptis orare?

9. [84] Item. Que illa nova pietas Dei et Pape, quod impio et
inimico propter pecuniam concedunt animam piam et amicam dei
redimere, Et tamen propter necessitatem ipsius met pie et dilecte
anime non redimunt eam gratuita charitate?

10. [85] Item. Cur Canones penitentiales re ipsa et non usu iam
diu in semet abrogati et mortui adhuc tamen pecuniis redimuntur
per concessionem indulgentiarum tanquam vivacissimi?

11. [86] Item. Cur Papa, cuius opes hodie sunt opulentissimis
Crassis crassiores, non de suis pecuniis magis quam pauperum
fidelium struit unam tantummodo Basilicam sancti Petri?

12. [87] Item. Quid remittit aut participat Papa iis, qui per
contritionem perfectam ius habent plenarie remissionis et
participationis?

13. [88] Item. Quid adderetur ecclesie boni maioris, Si Papa,
sicut semel facit, ita centies in die cuilibet fidelium has
remissiones et participationes tribueret?

14. [89] Ex quo Papa salutem querit animarum per venias magis quam
pecunias, Cur suspendit literas et venias iam olim concessas, cum
sint eque efficaces?

15. [90] Hec scrupulosissima laicorum argumenta sola potestate
compescere nec reddita ratione diluere, Est ecclesiam et Papam
hostibus ridendos exponere et infelices christianos facere.

16. [91] Si ergo venie secundum spiritum et mentem Pape
predicarentur, facile illa omnia solverentur, immo non essent.

17. [92] Valeant itaque omnes illi prophete, qui dicunt populo
Christi `Pax pax,’ et non est pax.

18. [93] Bene agant omnes illi prophete, qui dicunt populo Christi
`Crux crux,’ et non est crux.

19. [94] Exhortandi sunt Christiani, ut caput suum Christum per
penas, mortes infernosque sequi studeant,

20. [95] Ac sic magis per multas tribulationes intrare celum quam
per securitatem pacis confidant.

M.D.Xvii.

Video clips of the 2003 film “Luther” about Martin Luther and the Reformation. I have a wide variety of views listed here. I don’t agree with all of them, but I enjoy the diversity. And it interests me that 500 years later people are still so passionate about Martin Luther.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn8I_HttB20&NR=1

Martin Luther defends himself at the Diet of Worms:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5P7QkHCfaI

Diet of Worms – Different movie version – black and white:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0F1utKV46w

Martin Luther in Rome (2003 LUTHER movie:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiSCnZ4wSMov

German Trailer – 2003 Luther film:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qlPKU_3eTA

A video saying Martin Luther is the “devil”:
One of the first defenses is “Luther said the Catholic church sold indulgences. That’s not true, they gave FREE indulgences to people that donated to rebuild St. Peter’s”. I’m told this argument is still used today…

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR0hCypT5-k

Video critical of Martin Luther:
Jesus Christ vs. Martin Luther – who will you follow?

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM8U6bnt37U

2002 Documentary on Luther and the Reformation:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFqWnEpZvjs

Why the Protestant Reformation matters – Sermon

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otGfG5dDl7Y

Attack on Martin Luther from YouTube member:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AH8V8iHFc9U

Catholic vs. Protestant (Apple Parody)

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FI5nzGU844

Battle Hymn of the Reformation
“A Mighty Fortress Is Our God”
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiRpUtVByxU

Martin Luther vs. the Catholic Church – Part One

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMe2lExkrtQ

Martin Luther vs. the Catholic Church Part Two – Documentary w/film clips

Martin Luther vs. The Catholic Church – Part Three

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbLqMdcvNOg

The Sanctuary Choir and Orchestra from Pioneer Drive Baptist Church in Abilene, Texas present Mark Hayes’ arrangement of “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” in their 10:35am service on February 24th, 2008.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRIp2nnlQuc

Martin Luther – Documentary Part One excerpt:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p01dS27bCQ

Luther documentary Part Two:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXLr_Rtv-es

Luther documentary Part Three:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY6hMVMtjPg

Documentary Part Four:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzUPp1BgWg8

Documentary Part Five:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29FiYa0A5tU

Documentary video Part Six:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i8u_KQvZkk

Martin Luther was not a saint. Here is
“Positive Atheism’s Big Scary List of Martin Luther Quotations”:
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/luther.htm

*****

This video is dedicated to Martin Luther who struggled a lifetime to understand more clearly a person’s relationship with God and to Luther’s insights which have been shared with us through these centuries..
“I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. God help me. Amen”,answered Dr.Martin Luther.
Standing before the Holy Roman Emperor
and the princes of Germany, Martin Luther refused to give way. From the moment he had nailed his ninety five theses to the church door in Wittenberg, he had been a wanted man.His enemies accused him of heresy, his books were burned, and he was threatened with excommunication and death.
Dr.Roland Bainton was a leading specialist in Reformation history. The author of many books, he was Titus Street Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Yale Divinity School in the United States. His most famous book “Here I Stand” pictures the struggles, conflicts and achievements in Martin Luther’s life and gives a vivid and exciting portrait of the man who reshaped the face of Europe and turned the church of his time upside-down. Now Dr.Bainton tells that story in the German countryside WHERE LUTHER WALKED!

Where Luther Walked – Part One
With the author of Here I Stand:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HESj2k6iLMc

Where Luther Walked – Part Two:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uwE-pt-c0Iv

Where Luther walked – Part Three:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwBXy2sJGlA

Martin Luther does the Chicken Dance
Ok, maybe I’ve spent too much time on Youtube now!

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_qtG90SpxM