Remember, Hell is filled with people who arrogantly thought that they'd never go there.
We review: Lutheranism did NOT begin by a popular movement of people leaving the Catholic Church, and building new churches for their new religion. It began by King Christian III and King Gustav I CONFISCATING all CATHOLIC CHURCH PROPERTY in Scandinavia and ordering it to be turned into Lutheran church property in a couple nations ... and "national churches," in other Scandinavian lands. Bishops were arrested in the process. The Protestant Confiscation was fueled by the Elector of Saxony, in 1520-21. Then in 1577, the Elector of Brandenburg joined the Protestant Confiscation.
Luther also advocated the eviction of the Jews from all of Germany, during a time before Germany was even called Germany. This is why he literally became a Nazi German poster boy in 1933. Luther was used by the Nazis, to prove to the German people that everything Hitler said about the Jews was true --- that Martin Luther gave his endorsement of Hitler's answer to the "Jewish Question."
 |
| Here is where the Seed of the Antichrist was planted, as in the Undoing of Christ. |
If
it were not for Martin Luther's anti-Jewish rhetoric in the 16th
Century, the Nazis would never have gotten away with killing anywhere
near the 6 million Jews they killed in the 20th Century. The German
people chipped in, and helped their Fuhrer exterminate millions of
Jews. Adolph could not have done it alone. All credit goes to the
German People who did Hitler's dirty work for him. And Luther was
literally an inspiration. The lesson here is to be careful about the
writings you leave behind for future generations to read. The other
lesson here is that evil is attracted to evil, as in Hitler and Luther.
Concerning the 95 Theses text,
only 41 of those one-line statements were declared heretical. The
other 54 statements were declared fine --- "not contrary to the Catholic
Faith." Even at that, Luther was given 60 days to file a recant of
those 41 heretical statements. Then, he was given an extra 60 days to
get a copy delivered to the Vatican. Thus, Luther started out as only
half a heretic --- actually 43% heretic . He eventually got himself
into quicksand, as in when he agreed to debate Erasmus. (which see.)
Luther then started the fad of book-burning, by burning Catholic Church
notices that were sent to him.
His heresies started in 1517. He wasn't excommunicated, until 1521. Thus, he was given the needed time and process of the law. Therefore, it is a great falsehood to claim that the Elector of Saxony gave Luther sanctuary, in order to finally give Luther a fair chance. Luther was given YEARS of fair chances ... and papal patience.
Even after Luther was
excommunicated, Charles V allowed Luther to testify on his own behalf,
directly to the assembly of leaders of the Holy Roman Empire. Luther
was given chance after chance after chance after chance. Thus, it's a
damnable lie to say that Luther was deprived of his rights ... and that
the Elector of Saxony only gave Luther sanctuary, out of the kindness of
his heart.
Do not be deceived. Harboring Luther was a Las Vegas gamble, in betting that a young & relatively newly elected Hapsburg would be too thinned-out in imperial duties to order drastic measures against Luther and Saxony. After all . . .
... Charles
V was already the King of Spain and also of Austria, meaning that he
had to deal with the vast American holdings to the West and the threat
of the Ottoman Turks to the East. There was warfare in Italy ...
against the French ... for Charles to monitor, while he was in Spain,
dealing with the Comuneros Rebellion.. He was also in charge of the
Netherlands, and he was King of Naples. Let us not forget about the
warfare in Protestant Switzerland.
Plus, nearby Denmark had a
bloodletting king ... Christian II ... who was shedding blood in
Sweden. Thus, Luther appeared to have a strong ally nearby.
Ironically, it wouldn't be until his son, Christian III, took the throne
of Denmark that Norway would be ordered to become Lutheran. None the
less, the gamble of 1521 worked very successfully.
 |
| Martin Luther's protector & new employer, Frederich III, Elector of Saxony. |
The word, Protestant, came into existence after the April 1529 Protestation at Speyer. The Protestation was a response to the imperial assembly's repeal of a 1526 law which directed every jurisdiction in the empire to designate its own official religion. Then, in 1529, it was decided that the empire would solely adhere to the one religion professed by its long line of emperors.
More importantly, religion was regarded throughout human history as if it were a national language. Now, the language spoken by the most people in any one nation officially becomes its national language. Well, the spiritual language spoken the most throughout the existence of the Holy Roman Empire was Catholicism. Therefore, designating a newly formed religion as a nation's official religion ... or a jurisdiction's official religion ... was entirely artificial, unnatural, and done without the consent of the citizenry. Religion comes through the practice of custom & tradition. A national religion takes time to actualize itself. And of course, a government is supposed to reflect the will of its People.
Christianity did NOT appear overnight in the Ancient Roman Empire
Lutheranism, Anabaptism, and Calvinism were neither a part of the People's customs nor traditions. They were too new to be any nation's most popular religion. In fact, Christianity was practiced throughout the ancient Roman Empire well over 250 years before the Edict of Milan simply granted freedom of religion per se, along with restitution to the persecuted Christians whose assets were previously seized.
Contrary to the propaganda, Christianity was NOT suddenly made the official religion of the Ancient Roman Empire. Thus, in 1521, it would have been an act of usurpation and/or tyranny to have imposed any newly formed Protestant sect upon anyone in the Holy Roman Empire who practiced Catholicism as a part of a three hundred, six hundred, or even nine hundred year tradition. So, the axiom at hand is . . .
[1] the People vote by means of the customs & traditions they follow.
[2] the People vote with their coin purses ... wallets ... checkbooks ... debit cards.
[3] the People vote on their state religion, by their church attendance. Very simple.
There is one great irony here. In Catholic doctrine, becoming Catholic required FULL CONSENT. The same is the teaching on marriage. Thus, "no shotgun wedding is valid" was a motto in Catholic Church teaching.
All
in all, you cannot morally force a person into a religion. This
includes Lutheranism in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Iceland.
Thus, no king can force religion on you. A king can simply enforce a
moral code of conduct, derived from "natural law" and instinctive
common sense. He can order you to not throw elderly women on to subway
tracks, but he can't order you to believe who created Planet Earth.
Now, this should instantly bring to your mind a question about Spain and the Jews. Concerning the Jews of Spain, the bankers amongst them were funding the occupier Moors, for hundreds of years. (See: Jizya.)
The invaders of the past 7 centuries were now conquered, and Queen Isabella was not going let Spain endure another "pernicious conquest" of Spain, again. Being that it took a long time to get the occupiers out of their country, Isabella was going to make sure that they would not return as anything other than tourists. So, the Muslims' favorite bankers were ousted. They happened to be Jewish.
However, there was a loophole
that Isabella had to honor. Some of those Jews converted throughout
the centuries. After all, Jews did marry Spaniards. Jews married
Italians. My Italian-Spanish-Jewish baselines of DNA, along with my J2
haplogroup YDNA indicates this to have been the case. (It's the same
YDNA as possessed by the Rothchilds, Adam Sandler, Bernie Sanders, etc
--- very common amongst Jews So, Isabella couldn't rightfully toss out
the Catholic Jews.)
This then created a second loophole. Run
out and get baptized, and you get to stay in Spain. HOWEVER, Catholic
baptism is not instantaneous. There is the Rite of Christian
Initiation, as in [1] tutorial classes on doctrine & the
sacraments. Also included is [2] "a baptismal sponsor," where any adult
Catholic will do. And then there is the matter of [3] being introduced
to a parish ... or at a cathedral ... on a Palm Sunday mass. {5} Then
comes the baptism, for those not yet baptized. So, going through the
Rite of Christian Initiation was a great way to delay your deportation.
In conclusion, the ousting of Jews from Spain was seen as the military
tactic of "cutting off" the enemies' supply lines ... financial supply
lines. The Jews funded Muslim invader in 7th Century Jerusalem, also.
Now comes the two contradictions: [1] Muslim Moors were allowed to stay in Spain, as Mudéjares. They did NOT have to convert. If they became Moorish converts to Catholicism, they were Moriscos. However, at the end of the 16th Century, the Moriscos were accused by the chief royal financial officer of conspiring with Barbary pirates, for profit. Finally, in 1609, the Moriscos were ordered out of Spain, despite the fact that they were Roman Catholic. The majority of them took refuge in northwestern Africa. At the time, that area was known as Maghreb. The job was completed under Philip III, in 1614.
[2] There were native Spaniards who gave-in to the Moors, too. Why weren't they ousted?
The lesson here is that evil sometimes changes sides. The eviction of Roman Catholic Moors was one of the more asinine debacles in public relations history, with the ill effects remaining for centuries to follow. And concerning the Jews, all that was needed to be done was a seasonal audit of their financial assets.
Even in Nazi Germany,
when it came to German citizens having complaints against certain Jewish
financial practices, all that had to be done was for them to file a
complaint in civil court. The Germans needed to take Jews to civil
court ... to Judge Wapner's People's Court ... to Judge Judy's court ...
not to concentration camps. Hitler overacted one too many times in his
life. He also broke every treaty he ever signed. Oh, and he also
called the nuclear bomb the wunderwaffe - - - the wonder weapon. He
was clueless about nuclear fallout.
Italy had its griefs during the 16th Century, too
In the 1520s, there was in progress one of the seven "Italian Wars." (Only six of them were called "Italian Wars.) It involved a sequence of three legitimate popes in a tightly knitted time span. The middle one was the Dutchman, Adrian VI, personal friend of Belgian-born Charles V. His reign was less than two years in length.
None the less, he and his predecessor were friendly to the Hapsburg family member who held the position of Holy Roman Emperor in the early 1520s --- except during the Year 1524. But, Adrian's immediate successor created an alliance that opposed the Hapsburg family member, Charles V. It was called the Cognac League, and its creation resulted in a war that saw the Holy Roman Empire opposed by France, the Papal States, and eight other armies.
That war began in 1526 and
then continued until the Muslim Turks made their first attempt to
conquer Vienna, in 1529. Then, in 1530, the Papal States became an ally
of Charles, being that Charles proved himself to be a defender of the
Faith, in saving Vienna from the invading Ottoman Turks. Only then was
Charles V crowned emperor by a Clement VII whose papacy would come to be
overloaded with political power plays and the accompanying wars. And
then, after his tragic papacy, things would only get worse in Europe.
For the record, Vienna was only the capital of Austria; not of the Holy
Roman Empire.
And yes, 34,000 imperial troops ignored Charles
V's order to confront the Turks, and instead brutally sacked Rome, in
the Spring of 1527. This is what happens when you defeat your enemy
(the French) and do NOT quickly pay your victorious soldiers any wage.
None the less, in the 1520s Charles had to deal with [1] the attacks of the Ottoman Muslims ... [2] the violence surrounding the newly formed Lutherans of Germany who were no friends of the newly formed Anabaptists ... [3] the armed Calvinists in Switzerland who were no friends of the exact same Anabaptists ... [4] warfare against France, even on Italian terrain ... [5] the distrust of (and military hostilities from) a legitimate pope and his legitimate papal states ...
. . . and
then, in the 1540s, there would be Calvinists in Meaux France, while
Charles was trying to have the Treaty of Crepy bring peace ... at least
with his great rival, France's Francis I. Charles endured into the
mid-1550s. He then abdicated. He was simply wracked and drained of
strength. Thirty-seven years as emperor was long enough. All in all,
whether you are a winner or a loser, war will cost you, in the end.
Attempts at Peace will simply drain you.
French Protestantism: a religion imported across the Eastern border
Even the French versions of Protestantism originated in northeastern
France and in Calvinist Switzerland. Then, during the reign of Louis
XIV, the Calvinist Huguenots had to abandon their strongholds in
Southern France, being that they were accused of soliciting political
allies unfriendly toward the French monarchy. Thus came the Edict of
Fontainebleu, in 1685. Louis XIV literally feared a coup d'etat from
Protestants. After all, Protestants made a long-term fad out of
stealing acres of Catholic Church property throughout Europe. However,
in the case of France, outraged secular laymen would take hold of church
property in the 1790s.
Ironically, Louis XVI would enact the Edict of Versailles, in 1787, extending a portion of tolerance to any and every Protestant sect. It was all for nothing. Two years later, he would be removed from power. On March 21, 1804, Napoleon would grant complete religious liberty throughout his French empire.
Napoleon was an Italian aristocrat from Corsica, and he did go to Sunday Mass, where he would respectfully hold his famous hat under his left arm. In fact, a valet of his spoke of a time when atheists were mentioning how they only believed in matter and not in spirit. Napoleon then pointed toward the starlit night and said, "You may talk as long as please, gentlemen. But who made all of that?"
Despite
this, Napoleon's great problem was that he needed moral theology
lessons in [1] not pillaging a conquered nation, and [2] in discerning a
just war. Concerning this, Napoleon was in shock to find out how poor
19th Century Spain was. There was not much pillaging and plundering to
do there. Napoleon concluded that he wasted his time invading Spain.
Napoleon
did not believe in the separation of Church & State; only in limits
of power between the two entities. None the less, from 1685 until the
end of the Holy Roman Empire, Protestantism resumed being the Northern
European phenomenon that it was at the end of the 30 Years War.
In the end, Napoleon Bonaparte would accomplish in the early 19th
Century that which the Protestants were trying to do, for 283 years ---
dissolve the Holy Roman Empire.
Now that's what I call a
dictator!
Ordering the memory of St Thomas a Becket
to be erased from every British mind
Who needs Orwell's 1984, when you have Henry VIII's 1534? As far as went the Northwestern Isles of Europe during the Protestant Movement, Henry VIII would successfully steal Catholic Church real estate, in "dissolving" approximately or exactly 189 monasteries ... and in taking every other acre of Catholic Church property in England.
Henry would then proceed with a fund-raising campaign which consisted in him selling church property to the British gentry. In fact, he was dependent upon the British parliament throughout his reign. After all, he was not a creative fund-raiser and he was not versed in any form of economics beyond standard "mercantilism." So, he had need of the Parliament's treasury.
His Protestant daughter, Elizabeth, would depend upon ship crews called "privateers," for economic relief. A privateer is a pirate. Yes, the British Crown gladly accepted stolen property from Spanish, French, and Portuguese ships. After all, Protestantism did not have a concept of "making restitution for theft." Nor did it have a concept of "restitution for damages caused by defamation." The defamation against Catholic entities went beyond the level of ridiculous. That topic is for another discourse ... due to time and print space. None the less . . .
Ireland was a cash crop for England, in its emerald isle forests. It is written, "The British Navy was built on Irish oak." In as much, if you believed that Protestantism was a movement to make people moral, while the Catholics were being all so evil, then you are sadly mistaken. The Irish were minding their own business. The Catholics were the victims, for the most part. But not always.
******************************************************************
Part 5 of 8 parts: http://www.theheartofmary.com/2023/02/summit-of-truth5.html
******************************************************************
