REPOST: Luther's 95 Theses...Part III
If they're important enough to lead hundreds of millions out of the Church Jesus built, people should actually read them
It is generally claimed that the Protestant Revolt began on October 31, 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door in Wittenberg, Germany. This event led to hundreds of millions of souls being led out of the Church that Jesus built, and have separated them from God and the Body of Christ. So it’s a horrific spiritual crime that has ruptured mankind and fractured the entire Western world. Many people, especially Protestants, believe that in these Theses were the first declarations of the doctrines of Sola Fide (Faith Alone) and Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone). So let’s take a look at these 95 Theses and see why they are so important.
This will be Part III. The text of the 95 Theses is in italics, and my commentary will be in normal font. Links to three different sources for translations of the text are at the bottom of this post.
We start here with Theses 65-95. Theses 1-32 are in Part I and 33-64 are in Part II
65. Therefore, the treasures of the Gospel are nets, with which, in times of yore, one fished for the men of Mammon.
It’s true that good works from Christians have been a powerful tool in drawing attention for the Christian faith. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t also meritorious when done in faith to do the Father’s will. This is an unnecessary separation for something that is both.
66. But the treasures of indulgence are nets, with which now-a-days one fishes for the Mammon of men.
As previously stated, indulgences were never permitted to be sold. Some indulgences were tied to donations given in good faith for charity or building churches for God. Those have since been ended since there can be an appearance of impropriety with it.
This objection entirely ignores the vast number of indulgences that have nothing to do with money.
67. Those indulgences, which the preachers proclaim to be great mercies, are indeed great mercies, forasmuch as they promote gain.
Luther seems to be simply attacking the very concept of indulgences rather than those who might be abusing them. It’s a lazy form of attack where you attack the bad actors in a faith, religion, movement, etc; rather than the beliefs or arguments of the group, religion, faith, movement, etc.
68. And yet they are of the smallest compared to the grace of God and to the devotion of the Cross.
This is true. Our prayers, penance, good works, and charity are infinitely lesser than the eternal and infinite sacrifice of the Son to the Father on Calvary. That does not mean they are worthless or without merit. Again, a lazy form of argumentation from Luther.
69. Bishops and curates ought to mark with eyes and ears, that the commissaries of apostolical (that is, Popish) pardons are received with all reverence.
Here he says that delegates of the Pope should be received with reverence. Who exactly was arguing against this?
70. But they ought still more to mark with eyes and ears, that these commissaries do not preach their own fancies instead of what the Pope has commanded.
Ok. This is fine. Bishops should make sure that delegates from the Pope actually proclaim the message the Pope gives them.
71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolical pardons, be anathema and cursed.
Apostolic pardons are a wonderful grace given to the Church from God. You should ask your priest about receiving one when you are near death. Notice that Luther here still agrees with the truth that the Pope has tremendous authority not only here on earth but in Heaven too.
What’s also interesting is that Luther again sets himself up as the final authority in the Christian faith and he will determine what is and what is not anathema.
72. But blessed be he who is on his guard against the preacher's of pardons naughty and impudent words.
And now Luther is imitating Our Lord in the Beatitudes given on the Sermon on the Mount. It seems Luther has a difficult time with remembering exactly who is in charge in the Christian faith. His ego it seems is boundless.
73. As the Pope justly disgraces and excommunicates those who use any kind of contrivance to do damage to the traffic in indulgences.
This is a great one that many Protestants will abhor. Luther both admits the Pope has the authority to excommunicate and that indulgences are legitimate and true.
74. Much more it is his intention to disgrace and excommunicate those who, under the pretext of indulgences, use contrivance to do damage to holy love and truth.
Same as above.
75. To think that the Popish pardons have power to absolve a man even if - to utter an impossibility - he had violated the Mother of God, is madness.
This one will make Protestants have nightmares. Here he shows that Our Lady is the Mother of God and that she is above all other Christians in holiness and glory, and that sins committed against her are particularly heinous.
But yet again, Luther deems himself to be the one who determines what sins can and cannot be forgiven by the Pope in Confession. Luther is the one who determines everything about the Christian faith apparently.
76. We assert on the contrary that the Popish pardon cannot take away the least of daily sins, as regards the guilt of it.
Over and over Luther sets himself up as the man who decides the limits and authority within the Christian faith. Of course we should never ask exactly where Luther got this unique authority over all Christianity!
77. To say that St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could show no greater mercies, is blasphemy against St. Peter and the Pope.
This and the next one apparently refer to the Gospel and the sacraments as being greater than indulgences. Since indulgences do not forgive sins and do not affect salvation, this point is true and so is the next one.
78. We assert on the contrary that both this and every other Pope has greater mercies to show: namely, the Gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc. (1.Cor.XII).
See above.
79. He who says that the cross with the Pope's arms, solemnly set on high, has as much power as the Cross of Christ, blasphemes God.
I don’t know who was saying this, but everything that is in the office of the papacy is related to and gets its power and authority from Christ and His Cross. You can’t really separate them. Christianity is a contained and interwoven truth and religion. You cannot break apart the faith.
80. Those bishops, curates, and theologists, who allow such speeches to be uttered among the people, will have one day to answer for it.
This is true. Bishops who allow blasphemy and errors to be preached to the faithful will have to answer before God for allowing it. Just as the bishop who was in authority over Luther will have to answer for his refusal to punish and excommunicate Luther and his errors quickly before they started taking people out of the Church Jesus built.
81. Such impudent sermons concerning indulgences make it difficult even for learned men to protect the Pope's honor and dignity against the calumnies, or at all events against the searching questions, of the laymen.
Same as above. Blasphemous and erroneous homilies should be met with immediate resistance and punishment.
82. As for instance: - Why does not the Pope deliver all souls at the same time out of Purgatory for the sake of most holy love and on account of the bitterest distress of those souls - this being the most imperative of all motives, - while he saves an infinite number of souls for the sake of that most miserable thing money, to be spent on St. Peter's Minster: - this being the very slightest of motives?
The answer on this is the simple fact that everyone is at a different level of holiness and a different level of attachment to sin. The purification that a scoundrel needs is significantly different from the purification of a near-saint.
His accusation that greed is the motive for the Pope “withholding” mercy is straight calumny.
83. Or again: - Why do masses for the dead continue, and why does not the Pope return or permit to be withdrawn the funds which were established for the sake of the dead, since it is now wrong to pray for those who are already saved?
The answer is simple, Martin Luther is wrong on this. Those in Purgatory are saved but still being purified. As such they need our prayers and indulgences to help them in their purification. Luther is wrong, not the Church.
84. Again: - What is this new holiness of God and the Pope that, for money's sake, they permit the wicked and the enemy of God to save a pious soul, faithful to God, and yet will not save that pious and beloved soul without payment, out of love, and on account of its great distress?
Again, Luther displays his excessive ignorance about indulgences. There were always FAR more indulgences that were not connected to money compared to the few that were. The poor can always perform indulgences. They are free to perform.
85. Again: - Why is it that the canons of penance, long abrogated and dead in themselves, because they are not used, are yet still paid for with money through the granting of pardons, as if they were still in force and alive?
If indulgences have fallen into lack of use, then that is a condemnation upon Luther and his fellow priests who didn’t teach about them. Indulgences and the teaching on them don’t go away just because few people know about them and perform them.
86. Again: - Why does not the Pope build St. Peter's Minster with his own money - since his riches are now more ample than those of Crassus, - rather than with the money of poor Christians?
I can’t speak to how much money was in the possession of the papacy at this time. I seriously doubt Martin Luther knew that either.
87. Again: -Why does the Pope remit or give to those who, through perfect penitence, have already a right to plenary remission and pardon?
Luther here is asking why the Pope gives to the faithful what they deserve. Read the sentence again. I told you Luther was not a great thinker (but he certainly thought he was).
88. Again: - What greater good could the Church receive, than if the Pope presented this remission and pardon a hundred times a day to every believer, instead of but once, as he does now?
This question is asking why you can only perform one indulgence per day. The reason should be very clear and evident. Indulgences should be a way of life and a way to form us into Christians who live the faith out every single day. It should not be a situation where a person can slouch all week and then rack up a bunch of indulgences in one day. Someone once said to pick up your cross each day. He did not say to leave it on the ground all week and then lift it seven times on Sunday.
89. If the Pope seeks by his pardon the salvation of souls, rather than money, why does he annul letters of indulgence granted long ago, and declare them out of force, though they are still in force?
Don’t know the specifics of this, but some indulgences are ended because they either were not spiritually beneficial or they were not as effective as desired. It is a prudential decision for those in authority. But Luther again shows that he is ignorant of the fact that most indulgences did not involve money at all.
90. To repress these very telling questions of the laymen by force, and not to solve them by telling the truth, is to expose the Church and the Pope to the enemy's ridicule and to make Christian people unhappy.
Well I certainly could understand if these questions were repressed because as has been shown several times, they are based upon ignorance and faulty knowledge of Luther. The premise of his questions is in error.
91. Therefore, if pardons were preached according to the Pope's intention and opinion, all these objections would be easily answered, nay, they never had occurred.
These objections are pretty easily answered. I just did it in three posts.
92. Away then with all those prophets who say to the community of Christ, "Peace, peace", and there is no peace.
This might be the most ironic sentence ever written.
93. But blessed be all those prophets who say to the community of Christ, "The cross, the cross," and there is no cross.
It is true that Christianity without the Cross is empty and meaningless. You cannot have Christ without His Cross. Just as you cannot have Christ without His Body, the Catholic Church. Luther eventually attempts to worship a decapitated Christ by trying to worship Christ without His Body.
94. Christians should be exhorted to endeavor to follow Christ their Head through Cross, Death, and Hell,
Indeed. This is true. Christians should perform indulgences as often as they can. They are very holy.
95. And thus hope with confidence to enter Heaven through many miseries, rather than in false security.
Yes we must work out our salvation in fear and trembling, as Scripture says. Jesus wasn’t kidding when He said that only those who endure until the end will be saved.
Hopefully from this three part series, you were able to see that the 95 Theses are not what they have been taught to be. Mostly it shows Martin Luther’s ignorance about indulgences, mixed in with a few things he does get right because they are what the Church already was teaching.
As you can see, in NONE of these 95 Theses, do you see the doctrines of Sola Fide (Faith Alone) or Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone). Those new doctrines had not been invented by Luther yet. They were entirely unknown in Christianity.
Theses 1-32 are in Part I and 33-64 are in Part II.
https://holyword.church/miscellaneous-resources/martin-luther-and-his-95-theses/#95
https://www.uncommon-travel-germany.com/martin-luther-95-theses.html
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/luther95.txt
The response from the Church was summarized by Pope Leo X in 1520 in his papal bull called Exurge Domine. Take the time to read it. Here also are the decrees and canons from the Council of Trent
Thank you yet again for these three days of thought provoking works. They reinforce for me the pure treasure of our Catholic faith. All Saints Day what we’re striving for and the beautiful sung Requiem Mass my parish will be attending on All Souls Day. 🙏📿