Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Luther / Bossuet/Hobbes
Martin Luther's Radical Religion Vision
When Martin Luther nailed his infamous 95 Theses to the door of the cathedral in Wittenberg, Germany in 1517, he could hardly have foreseen that the consequences of his declarations would shake the Western world for centuries. While Luther was certainly not working in a vacuum and absorbed many of his attitudes towards the Catholic Church from the growing mistrust of the papacy in Germany at the time, his elegant theological arguments against the power of the pope and the rituals of Catholicism provided a strong religious alternative to the Roman Catholic faith.
The instigation for the 95 Theses and one of the issues at the heart of Luther's argument against the Church was the practice of the selling of indulgences. Indulgences were essentially letters of forgiveness from the Church that could be bought in lieu of the traditional good works that had to be performed for salvation. The idea that one could "buy" salvation from the Church was horrific to Luther. In the letter that prefaced his 95 Theses, he expressed dismay for "the unhappy souls [who] believe that if they have purchased letters of indulgence they are sure of their salvation" (Luther, 26). For Luther, salvation was solely at the discretion of God, and not even the most pious man could be sure of his salvation, much less the man who paid money for the forgiveness of his sins.
If salvation is to be achieved...
This attitude fundamentally undermined one of the cornerstones of Catholic faith: that the absolution of sins could be achieved through penitence, and that it could be dispensed by priests. For Luther, salvation was a matter between the individual and God.
There is a strong strain of individualism running through the Theses that serves to call into question not only the selling of indulgences but also the power of the Papacy. While Luther acknowledges that the declarations of remission and the ritual role that the pope plays are important to the life of the Church and are indeed indicative of the will of God, he does not acknowledge that the pope's power extends to the personal relationship between an individual and God. "Every true Christian," he states, "whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church, and this is granted him by God, with or without letters of pardon" (33).
While Luther does not seem to have conscientiously set out to break with the Catholic Church -- in fact, he makes many attempts in his early writings to protect the Church from the implications of his own statements -- his radical view of the deeply intimate relationship between every man and God, his demotion…
References
Carsten, Francis. The New Cambridge Modern History: The Ascendency of France: 1648-88. London: Cambridge University Press, 1961. Print.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Forgotten Books.org, 2008. Web.
Hobbes Leviathan Thomas Hobbes thought that all human beings were equal in the state of nature, but all equally greedy, violent, vengeful and brutal. As he argued in Leviathan, this was a universal trait of humanity and that the purpose of contracting to form a state and civil society was basically to keep order. As he put it in his famous formulation in Chapter 13, the state of nature was a
Hobbes vs. Locke Thomas Hobbes and John Locke each provide intriguing opinions concerning the state of nature, but their thinking differs when considering the form of governing that each promotes as being the most effective. The individuals in Locke's example of a government appear to have greater security than those in Hobbes', as the latter considers that there would be nothing wrong with people renouncing some of their rights in order
John Locke, who was a near descendant of Hobbes, differed most strongly in his political opinions and indicated that the 'state of nature' of which Hobbes talked would be preferable to having a sovereign government or absolute ruler and therefore be subjected to the whims and ideas of that person. Locke was not anti-political, but he did not share Hobbes' belief that having one ruler and therefore establishing one set
Therefore, the welfare of others cannot be relevant to judging what one ought to do. This is a very interesting argument, but it does not establish its conclusion. Although it may be that every human being has a right to preserve his own life, one would like some evidence in support of this key premise. Even if there is a human right to self-preservation, it does not follow that
He favored a large and powerful government able to enforce its will on subjects, in order to control their natural unruliness. Locke, on the other hand thought men in the state of nature were good, but that due to their need to be secure in their property and to protect themselves from outside forces, they banded together to form a state to benefit themselves individually. He favored a limited
The traits of the character are regular male traits from the society of that time. The character does not seem to be someone in particular (such a as a well-known knight or king), but a general representation of authority. And his name is Leviathan. The expression on his face is rather neutral, although the look in his eyes might transmit how heavy ad difficult the burden of authority is. This implies