In-Class Trial of Martin Luther

Role:  Defense Attorney

Charges:  
1.)  Development and preaching of heretical doctrines
2.)  Inciting members of the Catholic Church to rebel against the authority and established doctrines of the universal Church
3.)  Willful denial of the authority of the Pope and the Catholic Church

Both attorneys are allowed four primary and four follow-up questions of Martin Luther, and three primary and three follow-up questions for each of the other witnesses.

Development and preaching of heretical doctrines:
    The definition of “heresy” is “religious opinion that is opposed to the doctrines of the Church”.  In no way is Martin Luther guilty of heresy.  How could he be, when everything he has written about in his 95 Theses is based on the doctrines of the Bible and the Canon Law?  Let’s start at the beginning:  the action that shoved Luther into writing these Theses - the selling of indulgences.  Indulgences can be bought by the public to ensure one or one’s family member’s safe travel to Heaven.  Once you buy an indulgence, you receive a letter of absolution from your sins so that you can skip time in purgatory, granted by the Pope.  However, (no offense, your Holiness) but the Pope, however holy he may be, is not God.  Although he may be God’s voice on Earth, nowhere in the Bible does it state that he has the authority to remit punishment in purgatory.  Is Heaven a movie theatre where you can buy ticket and walk right in?  Martin Luther is not committing heresy by objecting against the sale of indulgences, as this “buying your way into Heaven” has no part whatsoever in the Bible.  

Inciting members of the Catholic Church to rebel against the authority and established doctrines of the universal Church
    I would like to point out that in 1521, once Luther realized that people in Wittenberg were rebelling against the authority of the Church because of him, he immediately wrote Admonition to All True Christians to Guard Themselves Against Sedition.  In this, he wrote that there were no grounds for rebellion against the Church.  Later, he preached for eight days at St. Mary’s Church about the need for patience and love.  About how he was ashamed that violence was connected to his name.  He continued preaching in order to fix the riots he had started.  Luther’s friend, Andreas Karlstadt, who had performed the first Mass in German and shared communion in both bread and wine with the people, went against the laws of the Catholic Church.  However, instead of approving of these actions, Luther disagreed, and tried to undo what Karlstadt had done.  Several years later, in 1524 and 1525, peasants began revolting against their masters as they believed Luther would have wanted.  They caused the destruction of their crops and many churches, monasteries, and castles.  Instead of supporting these acts of rebellion, however, Luther worked to suppress them.  He traveled to the towns of the villagers themselves in order to encourage them to cease with their violence.  When they wouldn’t stop, he wrote Against the Murderous and Thieving Hordes of Peasants where he stated that the peasants need to cease their revolt.   
    So as you can see, Luther did not mean to instigate rebellion against the Church, and when he discovered that he had, he immediately attempted to stop it.  He did not write his 95 Theses as a way to begin a whole new reformation - he just wanted to provide the spark for a discussion.  He is not guilty of the fact that others interpreted his writings differently than he wanted them to.  In fact, he sacrificed much in order for the violence caused by his writings to be prevented.  He lost his friend, Andreas Karlstadt, and the peasants grew to hate him because he did not support them in their revolts.  Martin Luther did not want people to rebel against the Church.  

Willful denial of the authority of the Pope and Catholic Church
    There is no question that Martin Luther denied the Pope’s request when asked to recant what he said in his writings, but he never denied the authority of the Catholic Church - only the actions of Leo X.  
    Who is Leo to say that Luther is denying the authority of the Catholic Church, when he himself is out spending thousands of ducats hunting, throwing lavish parties, building St. Peter’s basilica, and going to war?   German peasants are paying money for parties they do not get to attend, wars that only cost them money, and a church they cannot even visit, as it is far from Germany, AND, they are doing this through indulgences, which Leo has no right to sell.  His Holiness is abusing the power he wields.  Didn’t Leo say, “God has given me the papacy, let me enjoy it”?  Since when are parties and hunting part of the Pope’s duties?  Since when is it more important for the Pope to enjoy himself than represent God and carry out God’s will?   The Pope has so many responsibilities such as spreading the word of the Catholic Church, appointing bishops and cardinals, defining the Church’s position on issues facing the world, and more.  How can one man complete all of his responsibilities and do them well, while still having time and money for so much excessive enjoyment?  Luther was not going against the Church, or even the position of Pope - he was denying the right of Pope Leo the PERSON to sell indulgences and abuse his power.  
   

Questions for Martin Luther:
1.) Why did you find it necessary to translate the Bible into German?
A. I wanted the people to be able to interpret the Bible for themselves.  I think it is unjust to have the Bible interpreted for you by someone else, and I believed it was time for the people to decide for themselves what the Bible means.
    → In your opinion, why would the Pope not think this way?
        Because he wanted people to believe what he was saying, and nothing else.

2.) Did you mean for all the revolts and riots you caused in 1521 and 1524 to happen?
A. Of course I did not mean for those to happen!  I am ashamed that violence and destruction is connected to my name!  All I did was voice a few opinions.  I never wanted any revolts against the Church or the nobility.  You cannot accuse me of inciting a members of the Catholic Church to rebel against authority, because all I did was write a few books.  Let me put it this way:  in the future, if children were to play violent video games and then go out and commit violent acts, would it be the video-game company’s fault that the children committed violent crimes?  Can you truly blame them for the children's’ acts?  It is the same situation with me.  Can you truly blame me for the choices made by the people? And, when I found out they were revolting, I told them to stop!
    → So did you do anything to stop it?
        Yes, I did.  When I heard that people were revolting, I told them to stop.   In 1521 I wrote  Admonition to All True Christians to Guard Themselves Against Sedition, and then I preached for 8 days at St. Mary’s Church about the need for patience and love.  In 1524, when the peasants revolted, I traveled to their homes and told them to stop.  They didn’t listen to me, so I wrote Against the Murderous and Thieving Hordes of Peasants which was about stopping the peasants.  Afterward I wrote that, they called me their enemy.  

3.) Why did you find it necessary to write the 95 Theses?
A.  Because of these! (Holds up indulgence)  Johann Tetzel was selling these indulgences - letting people buy their innocence - which is completely unholy and against the  

4.) Were you denying the power and authority of the Pope and Church?
A.  No, I never denied the power of the Church, nor the authority of the Pope.  All I did was question the acts of one man:  Leo X.  I questioned his abusive use of the pontificate and his selling of indulgences - nothing more!  

Questions for Jon Huss:
1.) In your opinion, how could a person who has sinned gain salvation?
A. By repentance! :) It has to be in your heart.
    → So do you think that someone who has murdered, taken multiple wives, fathered twelve children with other women, and stole from his neighbor, can receive absolution from these sins by paying for an indulgence with money?
    A.  Of course not!  Anyone who has money can buy an indulgence and get into Heaven.  In order to truly gain salvation, you must be truly repentant in your heart.

Questions for Henry VIII:
1.) Why did you separate from the Catholic Church?
A. My first divorce would have been legal, except that the Pope would not grant it.  This was only for political gain, not spiritual at all.  That was when I realized that our Pope is corrupt and that the Catholic Church needs cleansing.  I took my nation away from the Pope because I believed that it was best for them.

2.)  Just to clarify, could you please define the reason why you needed the divorce?
A. I wanted the divorce because I needed a son for the kingdom. If I did not have a son, then war would break out over who would get power…etcetc.

Questions for John Calvin:
1.) Did you believe that the Bible translated into German?
A.  I think that everyone should be able to interpret the Bible for themselves

2.)  Why do you think that the Pope does not want the people to read the Bible?
A.  The Pope obviously does not believe that the people can read and interpret the Bible for themselves.  I, on the other hand, believe perfectly of understand the Bible without the help of the Church.  

3.)  How do you view indulgences?
A.  As Martin Luther has already said, the Pope does not have the power of God, he cannot be selling forgiveness, and he is also corrupt.  

Questions for Andreas Karlstadt:
1.)  What did you do after Martin Luther left the town of Wittenberg?  
A.  I took over being the leader of the town.  

2.)  When you took control of the town of Wittenberg, what did you do?  
A.  I changed the way Mass was celebrated and had a law passed in Wittenberg that made it so that all masses in the future would be like mine.  
      →     Did what you do go against the Catholic Church laws?  
    A.  Yes, it did.  I feel truly sorry about that now. :(  

3.)  After you invited Martin Luther to come back to Wittenberg, what did he do?
A.  He totally vetoed all my ideas!  He didn’t like that I was going against the Catholic Church, and made it all stop.  He worked to undo what I had done!  
      → So would you call Martin Luther a good Catholic?
    A.  Yes, because he undid all my own heretical reforms.

Questions for Leo X:
1.)  Please explain the reason why the church funds were so depleted that you had to increase the sale of indulgences in order to complete St. Peter’s Basilica?
     →    Is it not true that you spent 46,800,052 ducats on the Basilica, and is it not true that most of that money was from German peasants buying indulgences?

2.)   Is it true that you spent an embarrassingly large sum of money on food, parties, hunting, and entertainment (of which form, we do not know), even though the Bible preaches against gluttony? 

3.) If you truly have the power to release souls from purgatory, why would you not release all of them by the most holy thing of all:  love?
 

Reflection - Mosaic

I made my mosaic on the symbol of the triquetra.  To the left is a picture of one.  The word "triquetra" is Latin and means "three-cornered".  It was the original word for "triangle".  It has been used to represent the unity of things that have three parts:  maiden, mother, crone; past present future; the combination of the physical, mental, and spiritual aspects of the soul; the Holy Trinity.  The one on my mosaic represents the Holy Trinity - the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.  A picture of it is attached below: 

As you can see, there is yellow and orange border around a green background with a silver-and-blue triquetra on the inside.  The orange represents fire, the green is earth, the silver symbolizes air, and the blue shows water.  The triquetra represents the Holy Trinity and how God is three beings, but really just one God.  He is all-knowing everywhere on Earth and in Heaven.

I picked this symbol because I thought it looked very cool and was a much more interesting version of a triangle.  Also, I picked it because I thought I would be able to be a lot more creative in the color scheme.  For example, if I were doing an animal such as dove, I would have to make sure the dove was white; whereas the triquetra can be any color.

This project was not necessarily very hard - it was just tedious.  Especially when you are making a border or a background with one color, you are basically just cutting pieces of paper up and gluing them on a paper.  It can get very boring to do.  If I were an ancient mosaic-maker, I would not be a happy camper.  Making a real mosaic must be ten times harder than making one on paper.  You would first have to cut all the stone and glass up, which would take a lot longer than it does to cut paper.  You then have to spread plaster over the area you want to make your mosaic.  After that, you have to quickly place all the bits of stone and glass into the plaster before it dries.  The artist must be under so much pressure when they are making a mosaic, because of the fact that if they make a mistake, they lose valuable time for placing the rest of the tiles in the drying plaster.  The job would also be very tedious - especially because the areas of wall, floor, and ceiling you would be constructing the mosaic on would be so much larger than the little piece of paper I made my mosaic on.  It would take months, maybe years, to get a huge mosaic done. 

Maria Corazon Aquino

          Maria Corazon Aquino was a very important figure in Filipino politics.  She was born in Tarlac, Philippines, on January 25, 1933.  She went to school in Manila until she was thirteen, and then she went to the States to study in Philadelphia and New York City.  She then got at bachelor's degree in French and math at the College of Mount St. Vincent in New York.  After that, she went back to the Philippines to go to another school and met the man who would later become her husband:  Benigno Aquino Jr.  They married in 1954 and had five children.  Benigno quickly became an important political figure.  During a twenty-year period of time, he became mayor, governor, and senator.  He began to challenge the Filipino president, Ferdinand Marcos. 

          Marcos had become president in 1965, and ended up taking away the democratic rights of his people.  His presidency was corrupt, and he arrested those opposing him, including Benigno.  Benigno spent seven years in prison before he was exiled to the United States for three years with his family.  When he arrived back in the Philippines in 1983, he was promptly killed by two soldiers.  Marcos was believed to be behind Benigno's assassination, and a wave of angry opposition struck the president.  He quickly called for presidential elections, and the candidate running against him was none other than Maria Corazon Aquino.  When she lost against him, she and her supporters questioned the results of election.  The army and the defense minister decided to support Aquino, and Marcos was exiled to Hawaii.  Aquino became the first female president of the Philippines in 1986.  During her six years of presidency, Aquino struggled with the economical problems with her country and defeated rebellions made by Marcos' supporters.  She retired from office in 1992, and died of colon cancer in 2009.
          I chose Maria Corazon Aquino for this blogpost, because I thought that she was someone who accomplished a lot in her life, but I'd never heard of her so I wanted to learn more about her.  She ended the reign of a corrupt ruler over her country and became the first female Filipino president.  I admire the fact that, even after Marcos assassinated her husband, she still had the courage to oppose him in presidential elections.  I also like her determination to win against Marcos, even though it had been announced that she'd lost against him. 

Resource:
http://www.biography.com/people/corazon-aquino-9187250?page=1

Saint Angelina of Serbia

          Saint Angelina is a Christian Orthodox saint.  She was the daughter of Prince Skenderberg of Albania, but the name of her mother is unknown.  Angelina was raised to be a good Christian, and was taught to love God.  Saint Stephen, prince of Serbia, fled to Albania from people who wanted him dead.  He had been blinded by the Turkish Sultan for offenses he had not committed, but he was welcomed into Albania by Angelina's father.  As time went on, Stephen became more than an honored guest:  he was treated like part of the family.  Soon enough, Angelina and Stephen fell in love and were married with both the blessings of Angelina's parents and of the Church.   They had two children who grew up to become saints:  George and John.  However, after the boys had become men, Albania was invaded by the Turks.  Men, women, and children were slaughtered with no regard for their gender or age.  Stephen, Angelina, George, and John were forced to flee from Albania and take refuge in Italy.  There, they lived peacefully until Stephen died in 1468.  In her grief and poverty, Angelina asked the Hungarian ruler for help, and he allowed her and her sons to have the town of Kupinovo in Sirmie.  In 1486, St. Angelina led her small family out of Italy and buried the remains of her husband in his homeland: Serbia.  Angelina ended up outliving both her husband and her sons, and entered a convent where she spent her last years praying and living piously.  She died in peace and was buried in the same tomb as her sons in the monastery of Krushedol in Frushka Gora, Serbia.  Even today, she is still honored at that church on July 30th and also on the 10th of December with her husband, St. Stephen, and her son, St. John.

Works Cited:

"St. Angelina of Serbia." ROCA.org. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. <http://www.roca.org/OA/34/34k.htm>.

"St. Angelina of Serbia." Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. <http://www.antiochian.org/node/19134>.

The Fall of Rome

          At around 476 AD, the great Roman Empire fell apart when Odoacer, a Germanic chief, banished the last Roman emperor out of the country.  Scientists have speculated over several reasons as to why Rome finally fell: geography; economic decline; lack of technology which led to a decline in work force; growth of government; military defeat. 
          Rome was located around the Mediterranean Sea in a donut-like shape.  Because of this, it was difficult for the Roman armies to be everywhere around the empire at once while under attack.  Battling the invading barbarian tribes took away many valuable soldiers and resources away from Rome.
          The century before the fall of the empire,  the Roman government and army kept expanding.  Government officials and soldiers cost money.  Adding to the cost of the growing military was the fact that Rome did not cease to import expensive goods from far away countries.  The Roman Empire simply could not afford both of these things.
          Because of the Romans' lack of technology, there was a very high death rate in the Empire.  Also, the number of slaves decreased, so Rome was forced to deal with fewer workers having to make more goods for their fighting soldiers.  The wealthier Romans did not care about making machinery that would be more time and energy-efficient, and so it was very difficult for the workers to meet demands for goods.
          Lastly, the Roman Empire simply was not strong enough to hold back barbarian attacks for extended periods of time.  So many invasions eventually wore the military down, and Rome was overrun by barbarians.
           In my opinion, I think that the lack of technology and decline of work force was the most important reason for the decline of Rome.  Since the empire had not developed the best medicines for battling cancer and other fatal diseases, they had a very high death toll.  Because of the limited amount of people, there were not as many workers available for creating products.  Because of the barbarian invaders, there was an increase in the demand for weapons and other items.  However, there were not enough workers to supply for this demand, and the soldiers were not well enough equipped to face invaders.  This caused the military to weaken and eventually fall.  

Jesus Christ Superstar Movie Review

Not-so-Super Jesus Christ Superstar

Jesus Christ Superstar is a modernized version of the Bible in movie form.  It is an interesting take on the story of Jesus because its characters drive cars, carry guns, and wear clothing that did not exist back in the days when Jesus is rumored to have walked this earth.  However, the basic story of Jesus is gotten across to the audience, and you can tell that it is just like how it is written about in the four Gospels.  One thing that is missing about this is Jesus’ message.  It is difficult to understand why Jesus is so important until the end of the movie, and even then, the director does not include Jesus’ resurrection.  

Made in the early 1970’s, directed by Norman Jewison, and written by Tim Rice and Melvyn Bragg, Jesus Christ Superstar is a G-rated rock opera that   follows the last few weeks of the life of Jesus Christ in musical form.  In the beginning, Jesus (Ted Neeley) and his followers travel around the desert, happily accepting Jesus’ teachings, until his friend and apostle, Judas Iscariot (Carl Anderson) begins to doubt him.  The movie is then filled with very dramatic scenes, all of which are based on the Bible. 

In the film, as Jesus grows in power and popularity, the Jewish religious leaders start to view him as a threat.  They believe that they must kill him in order to prevent him from threatening their religion.  They think that with Jesus dead, they will once again be in control, and will be able to restore the city back to the peaceful order it once was.  Judas’s torturous decision to betray Jesus follows this scene.  You can almost feel the traitor’s anguish over this choice yourself, because he is so emotional and dramatic.  Then, Jesus’ trials and crucifixion are shown.  The movie is almost entirely based on the Bible, except for the fact that it is a rock opera.     

Jesus and Judas are both very intriguing characters.  It is interesting and thought provoking to see the movie’s take on the personalities of these two men.  When you read or are taught about the Bible, if you don’t get enough details, the rest of the story is up to your imagination.  Judas describes his feelings and his motives for betraying Jesus very well, and even if you don’t believe what he is doing is right, you can at least sympathize with him a little. 

I, personally, was not too impressed with the film, because I thought it was unrealistic and it also did not portray Jesus as I thought of him.  When you hear about the Bible, you get the feeling that Jesus is all-forgiving and all-understanding.  However, in the film, I feel that Jesus is pictured in a more edgy and angry way.  Also, the whole movie is written in song.  There is not one single word of dialogue in it.  The soundtrack is catchy if you like music from the 70’s, but I prefer musicals that have both speech and song in them.  Also, although Jesus Christ Superstar is rated G, its content seems very far from being appropriate for general audiences.  One very violent section of the movie is characterized by Judas hanging himself out of guilt and grief of betraying Jesus.  I do not believe that this is something younger children should be watching.  I would recommend this movie to people who are interested in learning about the Christian religion in a different format than the Bible and textbooks, but I cannot say that I would  just watch it for pleasure.

Bibliography

“Jesus Christ Superstar (1973).” Internet Movie Database. IMDb, 1990-2012. Web. 26 Jan. 2012. <http://www.imdb.com/‌title/‌tt0070239/>.