95 Theses of Martin Luther (1517)

by Martin Luther

The Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences, commonly known as The  Ninety-Five Theses, were written by Martin Luther in 1517 and are widely regarded as the primary catalyst for the Protestant Reformation. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh. The penalty, therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God’s remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiving. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it. Therefore by “full remission of all penalties” the pope means not actually “of all,” but only of those imposed by himself. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved; Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and high sounding promise of release from penalty. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession. They preach man who says that as soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory]. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sits. Severinus and Paschal. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him; For these “graces of pardon” concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction and these are appointed by man. They preach no Christian doctrine who teaches that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them]. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons; Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter’s church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope’s wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies. The “treasures of the Church,” out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church’s poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ’s merit, are that treasure; For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the “greatest graces” are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed! But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed! The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God — this is madness. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity. To wit: — “Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.” Again: — “Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?” Again: — “What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul’s own need, free it for pure love’s sake?” Again: — “Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?” Again: — “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?” Again: — “What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?” Again: — “What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?” “Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?” To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace! Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross! Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell; And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.

 

 

 

 

Difference between Sociology and other sciences

By Raaz Shrestha

There is closed relationship between all social sciences. They deal with the forms and contents of human interaction, society and social environments. As a young science, Sociology understands human social life by taking help from other social sciences such as History, Economics, Anthropology, Political science, Psychology.

There is a difference between sociology and other sciences in tabular form below:

 

Resurrection

 

                                                                                                                                     Author:

                                                                                                                                    Raaz Shrestha

Resurrection is the different term that we generally think. Means it is neither get back breath from dead person nor alive or rise from death. If it happens, His/her body will be same as before his/her death.

But Resurrection is very vast different from it. The body after Resurrection is called “Glorious body”. After Resurrection the body of man has no any bone and muscles but have amazing power(heavenly strength) and they can do everything as they can pass through wall and thy go everywhere they want. In these days, the age is not fixed means we never be die. We alive there forever. Neither our body will destroy nor do we get any pains.

In the long history of man, we found only one person who get resurrection and this type of body:- He is JESUS CHRIST. The followers of Christ (Believer’s or Christians) only accept and believe in Resurrection, not other people who are practicing other different religions. They don’t accept it but believe i9n superstitions and pre-birth and re-birth. It is meaningless belief.

We can see the various thoughts of different religions as bellows:-

1. 1.       Judaism:-

Still many Jews believe only Old Testament of Bible and they think their father is Abraham. But we know that after death of Abraham had not got Resurrection and no any evidences were there of it.

1. 2.       Buddhism:-

Buddhist believes at Gautama Buddha. He never teaches about God and Resurrection. Many years later, their followers announced him as god. There are no any proofs and or evidence of resurrection of Buddha.

1. 3.       Islam:-

Muhammad found this religion. He described the only one God “Allah”. But he never taught about Resurrection .He died in Medina(Saudi Arabia) in 632 A.D. There also was not found any evidence of his body resurrection.

1. 4.       Hinduism:-

Hindu believes many gods in form of idols. They have no any idea about who is real and true God among them. Hinduism teaches about pre-birth and re-birth but not resurrection. None evidence and proofs are found of resurrection.

1. 5.       Christian:-

Only this religion teaches about the Resurrection because Jesus Christ got resurrection and he taught that all believers (Christians) will get resurrection one day. It is detail written in Bible which is Voice of God or Word of God. So, all Christians must proud to it and waiting for that day.

There are many religions still practicing on the world. Such as Confucianism, Taoism, Sikhism etc. They do not teach about Resurrection. So, we should think that what is true way and what is not. Today is good day for taking decision about your life else we should regret tomorrow. God bless you.

Thank you!!

 

 

 

Mankinds search for only one GOD

GOD

    During the thousands of years of man kind’s history, man search search for God has led down many pathways. Man  searches many ways,walks various paths.many religions are still practicing for searching God way to go to God but they failed to find only one true God. We could not find the God who is our creator and our savior , but the Earth,all nature, stars, sun planets all are saying “God is still alive”. Definitely, God is everywhere and he lives in our heart.

Many religions describe a being referred to as “God.” Some of these religions describe the being God as one of many other gods created by more powerful gods or councils of gods. However, for the purpose of this paper, we are going to use the definition of God contained in the Bible.

As such, God is the Spirit hovering over the waters of the primordial Earth—Creator of the universe (matter, energy, space, and time), along with other principalities and beings whose primary existence is outside this universe. However, God did not just create the universe and leave it to its own fate as deists proclaim. God is the personal being who walked and talked with Adam and Eve, the first human beings, in the garden of Eden. God is also Savior of mankind, coming to Earth in the person of Jesus of Nazareth to provide the ultimate example of holiness and the ultimate sacrifice for humanity’s evilness, in order to restore our personal relationship with Him.

Who is God?

According to Christianity, God is the self-existent One, having no need of being created, since He has existed forever and is the

cause of all things, including the dimension of time, to which He is not subject (see If God Created Everything, Who Created God?). Likewise, God is not subject to the physical creation, but is spiritual in nature, residing in the spiritual dimensions of heaven. God’s power over the physical creation is absolute, such that He can manipulate matter, energy, space, and time at will. For this reason, God is said to be all powerful—able to accomplish any possible task He wills to do. Along with being all powerful, God is also all knowing—having knowledge of all things that are possible to be known, including the entire history of the universe—past, present, and future. Because God is all powerful (omnipotent) and all knowing (omniscient), He is also

able to be present at all places at all times (omnipresent). God is also all loving—according to the Bible, “God is love” (1 John 4:16). The love of God prompted Him to create human beings in His image, in order to share His love with us. The Christian scriptures say that we can fulfill the entire law of God by loving Him and loving our fellow human beings (Matthew 22:37-40). God is absolutely holy—without any moral or character defect. In fact, the Bible says that God is incapable of doing any evil, despite being all powerful.

 

Love is Life

In 21st century, Everyone  think that Love is sex. but it’s not only sex,,it is connection of two hearts and  feelings of pure heart. Couple does not love each other only for sex. They think love is life. Without it, we can not live and difficult to spend life. So it is called as Life. Some loves only by attraction. Love is also not only attraction……But Love must be pure forever without any Complain and any demand.Love each other even they are your enemies . love is always complicated. but still humans must try to love each other … we must get our hearts broken sometimes. this is a god sign, having a broken heart. it means we have tried for something.” – eat pray love, Elizabeth Gilbert.She hadn’t grown weaker, as she’d thought, only wearer, yes, but that would change now that she’d remembered who she was. and she was— definitely— a woman who did not shrink from gauntlets, but stepped up to them, and said, okay, bring it. bring your worst. i will get back up.Love runs the gamut from love of food to the love of God, and this encompasses humanity from pole to pole.

Love is a vibration denoting God at its highest frequency and scales on down in relativity of matter to its common denominator. Any individual at any level of life is capable of expressing opposites in any facet of life. However, some express the negative more often than the positive. At any given level of consciousness in the physical world, the opposites expressed are greater or less, according to the level of consciousness being lived. Human love at its lowest level is expressed as passion, both physical as well as mental. Love expressed through low physical passion with little or no consideration for the others feelings lacks in sensibilities. But love at a higher physical expression exhibits great consideration for the partner’s feelings and a desire to please. The physical relationship also moves from being animistic to one of loving care.Thank you!!!!!!!!

 

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com! This is your very first post. Click the Edit link to modify or delete it, or start a new post. If you like, use this post to tell readers why you started this blog and what you plan to do with it.

Happy blogging!