Machiavellian Reformation Essay

Luther the Reformer: The Story of the Man and His Career by James M. Kittelson is a biography of the famous German monk turned theologian and reformer, Martin Luther. This is one of the most influential men in history, and as a matter of fact, “In most big libraries, books by and about Martin Luther occupy more shelf room than those concerned with any other human being except Jesus of Nazareth” (Kittelson 9). This fame of Luther’s isn’t only postmortem, “This extraordinary interest in an extraordinary man reaches back almost half a millennium. Even in his own time Luther was a ‘media personality’ the first of such in three thousand years of human history” (Kittelson 9). Luther was a subject of great controversy in his own time, as well as in our, and it has only driven his name and message into the spotlight. No matter or what one aligns himself with, “People still find themselves taking sides on the question of Luther” (Kittelson 9). It is for this reason that James M. Kittelson wrote this survey. He tells us that “The primary purpose of this book is to tell the story of Martin Luther to readers who are not specialists in the field of Luther studies” (Kittelson 10). This book is a general overview of all aspects of Luther, not just a precise dissection of one aspect, which allows for “as faithful a picture as possible of the whole man” (Kittelson 11).

In Luther’s Address to the Christian Nobility, he states, “God has given us a young and noble sovereign, and has roused great hopes in many hearts; now it is right that we too should do what we can, and make good use of time and grace.” This establishes what he wants the German Nobility to do. He wants them to confront the church and make it stop the wrong it is doing. Luther is saying that God has given them the obligation to correct what the church has corrupted. God has given the

During the 1500’s a movement away from traditional Catholicism started to take hold. The most notable figure during this time was Martin Luther. He had ideals that, at the time, were extremely radical. As Gerald Strauss put it, “His doctrine of the two realms- the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of the world, derived directly from Augustine – entailed the strictest segregation of things spiritual and things material” (22). He did not believe that the people of the church had any right to control the population at large. He believed that they were meant to be spiritual guides, not rulers, and that they wielded way too much control over the common people. One of the most radical things that he did, which was also the most influential

He didn't want people to be mistreated how they grew up. If you wanna be a religious than do it. Don't let anyone stop you from being what you wanted, Martin Luther hated it when people get mistreated for who they are. One of his famous quotes is “darkness cannot drive out darkness;only light can do that. Hat cannot drive out hate; love can do that.” This is saying that light will drive out darkness and love can drive out hate. He wants everyone to be

Although the majority of Martin Luther’s ideas contradicted each other left and right, he had a few consistencies. Obviously his views of Sola Scriptura and consubstantiation did not drastically change, but there were some misleading topics that were disguised as inconsistencies. The major topic concerning this was his views towards peasants. It can be easily assumed that after being raised a peasant and supporting them, he immediately turned against them when they rebelled. However, this is deceiving. In 1519, Luther definitely supported the peasantry in his letter to the Prince. He saw them as one of his own and those who shall be “cherished forever,” but he did not mention anything related to what the peasants wanted that could help them. This implies that although Luther loved his people during his attacks against the Pope for the same reason as the peasants themselves, he still believed they should stay in their place (Doc6). Therefore, when the Peasant Rebellion broke out, it was completely justified for Luther to be upset with them. For that reason, it is actually a consistent idea of his that his people should not challenge authority because he had always supported peasants as long as they stayed in their place of oppression. Also due to this theory, it was relatively reasonable that he lashed out against the rebels in “Against the Murderous,

14. ’05 Compare and contrast the motives and actions of Martin Luther in the German states and King Henry VIII in England in bringing about religious change during the Reformation.

This essay will indicate the reasons that determine Luther’s attitude to political violence and authority by quoting from his writings. Luther would be placed at the lower left, as his attitude to political authority is “Christ against culture”, and especially Rejectionist (A), whereas his attitude to political violence is Realism (10) Luther’s attitude to political authority is quite similar to Augustine’s one, which stated that all authority is derived from God (p.168). He also mentioned, “They (as humans) should obey God’s commands, not because they appear just, but simply because they are God’s commands”(p.162).

Martin Luther's contribution to the Church could easily be dismissed because he is well known as anti-Semitic. In truth, he was, as most people are, more complicated than this. Luther is a wonderful example of the Grace of God using imperfect people. Luther is history's best proponent of justification by grace, yet some of his views did not always reflect God's love. God has not changed, He still chooses the average person to advance His kingdom. And why shouldn't He, we are all He's got!

If he performs works trying to earn salvation from God he is usurping God of what only God can grant. If he is under the false belief that his good work will save his inner soul then he continues to sin and his soul is bound by arrogance. Luther repeated often in Freedom of a Christian that only God could give salvation. “Which we do not perform but receive which we do not have but accept when God the Father grants it to us through Jesus Christ.” Salvation is not a task one can perform. It is not earned but received and the human soul, the inner person does not have the grace to be saved. It is by the mercy and compassion of God alone that salvation will be granted. Christ died for the sins of mankind and because of this God will grant salvation to some. Luther argues that Christians can only have faith in god for their salvation. Nothing they do will save or damn them.

Machiavelli continues with the analogy of force as being the main way to maintain power, whether force being used, or potential force that could be brought against someone. "It is unreasonable to expect that an armed man should obey one who is unarmed, or that an unarmed man should remain safe and secure when his servants are armed." (Machiavelli 48). This line draws on the fact that Machiavelli is deeply distrustful of people, and believes that the only guaranteed way to keep them

Martin Luther’s religious ideas created an eclectic mix of responses dealing with social power and influence in society. Many people reinvented Luther’s ideologies to fit their wants and goals. This in turn influenced peasants to strive for social justice, the Pope to be on the defensive to maintain authority, and world leaders like Charles V to use the reaction of the Pope for personal gain.

The renaissance period marked radical changes in many fields, this includes religion. The so-called Protestant Reformation was the split within western Christian Church initiated by Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other early Protestants. Calls for reform came form all sectors of the European society and it is this dissatisfaction that explains why the ideas of Martin Luther evoked such extreme responses, there was already a ready audience. Although there had been significant attempts at reform before Luther, the date usually given for the start of the Protestant Reformation is 1517, when Luther published The Ninety-Five Theses. As he developed his ideas, Luther gathered followers, who came to be called Protestants. The word protestant

When reading Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince, one can't help but grasp Machiavelli's argument that morality and politics can not exist in the same forum. However, when examining Machiavelli's various concepts in depth, one can conclude that perhaps his suggested violence and evil is fueled by a moral end of sorts. First and foremost, one must have the understanding that this book is aimed solely at the Prince or Emperor with the express purpose of aiding him in maintaining power. Therefore, it is essential to grasp his concepts of fortune and virtue. These two contrary concepts reflect the manner in which a Prince should govern while minimizing all chance and uncertainty. This kind of governing demands violence to be taken, however

In essence, Machiavelli’s ideal principality sustains a genuine sense of morality behind the violence that “must be subjected in order to maintain stability.” Looking at his plans subjectively,

Niccolò Machiavelli thoroughly discusses the importance of religion in the formation and maintenance of political authority in his famous works, The Prince and The Discourses. In his writing on religion, he states that religion is beneficiary in the formation of political authority and political leaders must support and endorse religion in order to maintain power. However, Machiavelli also critiques corrupt religious institutions that become involved in politics and in turn, cause corruption in the citizenry and divisions among the state. In the following essay, I will examine Machiavelli's analysis of religion and discuss the relationship between religion and politics in Machiavelli's thought.