Martin Luther
- Thread starter VVD0D95
- Start date
There would have been further developement of other Reformation movements as in OTL. But there might not have been this entirely autonomous branch of Christianity. Interesting would have been the thought, if the Anglican Church still would have been seperated from Catholicism by Henry VIII. (with married priests) without a continental Luther...
Last edited:
VVD0D95
Banned
Hmm would the split with Rome have happened in England, without Luther do you think? Well I mean I suppose Henry VIII probably would've done that, but would the Anglican church still be the same. without Luther to spear had the reformation movement?
tenthring
Banned
Martin Luther gave German princes and other NW European nobility an excuse to do what they already wanted. In addition it gave peasants the opportunity to make up their own thing (basically what protestantism is) to achieve their own ends, and acted as a good coordination mechanism for the peasant revolts.
The political, social, and cultural reasons for a North/South split were already there, and honestly politics always trumped religion anyway. Just look at Catholic France in the 30 years war.
So if he didn't exist someone else would have done it.
The political, social, and cultural reasons for a North/South split were already there, and honestly politics always trumped religion anyway. Just look at Catholic France in the 30 years war.
So if he didn't exist someone else would have done it.
It probably wouldn't have made that much of a difference. He wasn't the only person who was criticising the church at the time, and a lot of what he argued had been brought up a century before by Jan Hus. The major factors that played a role in his rise to prominence had more to do with the rise of the printing press that enabled the widespread propagation of radical ideas, and the support of his patron the Elector of Saxony. Sooner or later things were going to come to ahead.
VVD0D95
Banned
Hmm interesting, and quite funny as well considering how corrupt the church had become by that point. What would Jésus think
tenthring
Banned
Hmm interesting, and quite funny as well considering how corrupt the church had become by that point. What would Jésus think
That the Protestant churches that came after ended up being just as corrupt.
There are positives and negatives to both models, but I doubt Jesus has that strong of an opinion honestly.
Deimos
Banned
Not exactly. What people tend to forget are the extraordinary circumstances in the early 16th century in Germany.
- Luther's superior bishop Albrecht never underwent a theologic education and let Luther do as he pleased for a long time
- the Holy Roman Catholic Church waited very long before engaging in talks with Luther and declaring them heresy (that gave him several years to establish a powerbase and spread his ideas)
- Luther had with the Saxon electors one of the most prominent and richest princes in the HRE as benefactors
- the Holy Roman Emperor was not only a foreigner and not massively interested in Germany, he was also absent most of the time and distracted with other affairs
Protestantism was in its early beginnings more of a movement centered around towns and cities where theologians and students were influenced by Luther's ideas.
What the peasants wanted was socio-economic reform on the basis of their understanding of the reformation. The theology of their leaders was also a bit different from "orthodox protestantism" at the time (different views on the Eucharist and usually a very different view on the function of the Holy Ghost).
VVD0D95
Banned
Aha indeed, just shows, religion might be nice and all, but people can be quite greedy.
The Catholic Church was indeed in dire need of reform, and may well have been for close to a century (as Hus shows).
Doesn't mean another few decades couldn't have led to reform - the Franciscans (and others before) had managed some serious reform without permanently splitting the Church, for example. The early 16th century had some peculiarities that might not have existed later (like a massively powerful Habsburg realm willing and able to intervene in Italy and able to scare France, a pretty powerful Papal State willing but not always able to play at conquering land, a Turkish Empire knocking on Europe's doors...).
Doesn't mean another few decades couldn't have led to reform - the Franciscans (and others before) had managed some serious reform without permanently splitting the Church, for example. The early 16th century had some peculiarities that might not have existed later (like a massively powerful Habsburg realm willing and able to intervene in Italy and able to scare France, a pretty powerful Papal State willing but not always able to play at conquering land, a Turkish Empire knocking on Europe's doors...).
tenthring
Banned
Theology and ideology are social coordination mechanisms, they mold and get interpreted to fit sociological reality, rather then being some kind of concrete set of rational principles or systems people try to reconcile.
Reality at that time was that the middle age consensus was over, and with it the centralized RCC authority and the hierarchical ideal that was so critical to the middle ages.
Much of what seemed like life or death principles of the reformation were forgotten after not too long, meaning they were only ever excuses for the break from the past. What stuck is what fit in with the culture being developed in NW Europe at the time, but you've got to get your cart and horse in the right order.
It was discussed also here, before degenerating into a «you have killed this!», «but you have killed this other!»
I have mentioned Henri Pirenne, who, in my opinion, helps focus the essential points on which you can work.
I have mentioned Henri Pirenne, who, in my opinion, helps focus the essential points on which you can work.
Henry VIII. despised Luther and saw him as a heretic, Protestants even had been persecuted (the humanist Thomas Morus ironically favoured this). Henry obviously took his inspirations from the Lutheran movement but I would need an experts opinion on this topic to get this question awnsered in a valid way.
The effect of no Luther on the Church of England.
Well here's the thing. In terms of doctrine, the newly established Church of England remained largely Catholic. The whole purpose of the split was to free Henry from Papal authority and allow him to divorce his wife. I believe his legal justification for splitting went something along the lines of "King Arturh was totally real, and he proclaimed Britain an Empire, and as his successor that means I am an Emperor, and therefore not beholden to foreign power". It wasn't until his son Edward took the throne that more radical Protestant doctrine began to be incorporated.
The way I see it there are two main factors that will influence whether or not Henry breaks from Rome. The first is the weakening of Papal authority brought about by the reformation that allows this sort of action to be on the cards.
Second, there is the fact that at the time the current Pope was in the "custody" of Charles V of the HRE, who was a close relative of Catherine of Aragon, and therefore unlikley to allow the Pope to grant Henry a divorce. The thing is, however, the reason he ended up in custody, at least as far as I know, was due to the fact that Rome had recently been sacked by the disgruntled Imperial soldiers who Charles had sent to garrison Rome, many of whom were of Protestant sympathies.
If removing Luther butterflies, or at least delays, the chaos of the reformation, then it is less likely that Rome gets sacked, and therefore Henry is in a better position to negotiate with the Pope for a divorce, and therefore won't be as likely to break with Rome (although the opportunity to loot the monasteries might make him reconsider). If, on the other hand, removing Luther doesn't prevent the reformation then it's the same conditions as OTL.
Well here's the thing. In terms of doctrine, the newly established Church of England remained largely Catholic. The whole purpose of the split was to free Henry from Papal authority and allow him to divorce his wife. I believe his legal justification for splitting went something along the lines of "King Arturh was totally real, and he proclaimed Britain an Empire, and as his successor that means I am an Emperor, and therefore not beholden to foreign power". It wasn't until his son Edward took the throne that more radical Protestant doctrine began to be incorporated.
The way I see it there are two main factors that will influence whether or not Henry breaks from Rome. The first is the weakening of Papal authority brought about by the reformation that allows this sort of action to be on the cards.
Second, there is the fact that at the time the current Pope was in the "custody" of Charles V of the HRE, who was a close relative of Catherine of Aragon, and therefore unlikley to allow the Pope to grant Henry a divorce. The thing is, however, the reason he ended up in custody, at least as far as I know, was due to the fact that Rome had recently been sacked by the disgruntled Imperial soldiers who Charles had sent to garrison Rome, many of whom were of Protestant sympathies.
If removing Luther butterflies, or at least delays, the chaos of the reformation, then it is less likely that Rome gets sacked, and therefore Henry is in a better position to negotiate with the Pope for a divorce, and therefore won't be as likely to break with Rome (although the opportunity to loot the monasteries might make him reconsider). If, on the other hand, removing Luther doesn't prevent the reformation then it's the same conditions as OTL.
Henry always saw himself as a Catholic, he never was a Protestant, nor did he have a lot of sympathy with i. The process of creating an English church subject to the law and the King, was different to changing the faith, although it did make it easier for those who wanted to change the faith, AFTER his death. Particularly as the leading Catholics fell from power just before his death.
There was similarly moves towards creating a French (Gallican) Church although these remained less developed than the moves to create an Anlican Church, at least until after the revolution. No one would accuse the French of rejecting Catholicism.