Skip to main content

Luther and the Pope

Yesterday I finished reading Charles L. Mee's White Robe, Black Robe, a duel biography of Pope Leo X and Martin Luther from birth up until Leo's death in December 1521. It was a fascinating study, and well worth reading for anyone interested in either man, or understanding the causes of the Reformation. The beginnings of the Reformation are not only about Luther, who struggled for years and years with feelings of guilt over his perceived sins (though it is hard to think just what a man in a monastery could do that was so terrible), but it is also about Leo, the man who lead the Church at the time.

Leo ultimately failed in dealing with Luther, but he never knew it, and when he died in late 1521 Luther was far from his mind. The Diet of Worms was over, Luther was in hiding and in the pope's mind he had been effectively dealt with. Mee does an excellent job in playing up aspects of both men's cultures that prevented them from being able to understand each other. How could Luther ever discern the pope's motivations for his actions when Luther was politically naive, and every one of the pope's actions were political? How could Leo ever understand Luther when the pope himself didn't take theology seriously or think it important, preferring instead the joys of religious art and music, and Luther thought specific questions of faith to be of deadly importance? Why, for instance, would Leo be terribly concerned about an obscure German monk posting his writings in 1517 when earlier that year he had uncovered a plot against his life, led by none other than several prominent members of the College of Cardinals?

After reading this book, I feel that I have a better grasp on the causes of the Reformation, for Mee's work is excellent in dealing with the motivations of the two men, and in his treatment of Pope Leo he shows himself far more sympathetic than most historians have been, pointing out his strengths without ignoring his flaws.

Comments

  1. That sounds fascinating. I'm going to have to look that book up.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Unanswerable Questions" for Evolution Part One

Creation Ministries International has launched a new initiative, which seems a lot like all the other creationists blitzkriegs before it. With the wonderfully creative tagline of "Question Evolution", CMI intends to challenge "evolutionists" and their "indoctrination" of high school students with the supposed dogma of evolution. They also aim to  cut the population of atheists by half , presumably by challenging the "faith" that every atheist (and only atheists, no "real Christians") is supposed to hold in Darwin's great idea. The main thrust of this is a tract with fifteen "unanswerable" questions for evolutionists. I'm done putting quotation marks around the word, evolutionists; from here on out I ask my readers to recognize that it is a creationist term that is about as silly as calling someone a general relativist (accepts general relativity) or germist (for accepting germ theory). Regardless, CMI seems just as i...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...

The Absurdity/Agony of War

Science writer Mary Roach is never one to shy away from parts of science that verge on the absurd, as anyone who has read any of her books surely knows. I'd read two of her previous books, and been enchanted enough by Roach's unique combination of endless curiosity and a wry sense of humor that I rushed to lay my hands on her newest book. Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War will not fail in living up to the expectations that fans of her work will bring. Those who have never read her before will be hard-pressed to put down a book that I finished in a few short days.  The real joy of reading something by Mary Roach is her talent for seeking out strange areas of science that a reader might never have known about. As an investigator, she answers questions you never knew you had. Her newest work   is no exception. We discover, for instance, how the military tests the ability of a fighter jet to survive a mid-air collision with a large bird--by firing a dead chicken...