However one fact remains, both individuals went against the church by defying both it's legitimacy and power as well as it’s power, but as aforementioned, for very different purposes, but in both cases resulted in earning the title of heretic. Another area in which contrast could be seen between the two “heretics” was what one could call the outcome of their heretic practices against the church. In the case of Martin Luther he was excommunicated and sought after, but even more significantly he never recanted for his work nor apologized for it or for his clear contradiction against the Church. While on the other hand, Galileo recanted all his works, and suffered only a sentence of house arrest as a result. Each man although both suffered the burden of the title of being a heretic, each earned the infamous title through different manners, and each suffered contrasting consequences as a result of what was regarded as heretical practices.
The early reformers of the Catholic Church had one common thread; they felt the word of the Lord was grossly misinterpreted by the Church. Though the Church was working to give the people what they wanted, their practices were dishonest and they took liberties with the scriptures. Martin Luther cited two major corruptions in his Ninety Five Theses. The first was that salvation could be reached only by one’s own faith; secondly Luther objected to the selling of indulgences to provide absolution for sinners. The monies from these sales financed wars and expensive lifestyles of the popes, archbishops and bishops.
The Articles of Agreement of Springfield Massachusetts (1636) focused mainly on God and that all men and families that have come deserve equal opportunity. (Doc D) This created a peaceful society under God. There was no fighting between settlers creating a unified society that had a great ability to reach their goals of freedom, money, and power. The Chesapeake had not as much faith and had only hopes of personal gain and goals creating a very alienated society. The New England and Chesapeake regions had very different economies that caused them to become two distinct societies.
Arthur Dimmesdale committed the greater sin because he was a man of faith. He was not true to his sacred vows. He committed an adultary which is considered to be the worst sin because it is against one of the ten commandments. He told the people of lord to be true and faithful to their religion when he was not himself. He did not tell the people about his sin like Hester Prynne's was told.
One negative aspect to his essay would have to be his bias toward conservatives and the rich. He deliberately labels out the rich in many of his examples by pointing out how they claim to be Christian but do not wish to help aid the poor. As for conservatives, he not only points out George W. Bush but refers at times to religion as “conservative religion.” This clearly shows his bias toward them and could be a way for him to associate them with the American Christianity problem. I believe McKibben has a great point on this issue. As American Christians, we always believe that if we do good deeds or help ourselves we go to heaven.
The Puritans wanted to remove all practice and rituals of Catholicism from Europe. John Winthrop and fellow Puritans were frustrated with religious activities in England, “All other Churches of Europe are brought to desolation and or sinnes”. He believed that the Church was corrupted and that the lord “Frowned upon us, doe threatens us fearfully”. Winthrop believed that England was invaded by evil and ran by a corrupted Government, and that the roots for religious learning were being disturbed. They feared to live in such sinful society, because they believed that God predestined people to salvation and others were damned for the rest of time.
Just as this belief in equality had enabled America to build a great nation of liberty, Truman added, so too could it serve as the foundation for world peace. The president held that equality before God, recognized in good government, would undergird a brotherhood of man — much in the sense that Pius XII sketched in their Christmas 1949 exchange of messages — around the world. [10] Truman believed that peace would follow, not from world government but from the understanding of equality, morality and religion, strength, and freedom. “The greatest obstacle to peace,” he said, “is a modern tyranny led by a small group who have abandoned their faith in God. These tyrants have forsaken ethical and moral beliefs.
Henry VIII, having earned the title “Defender of Faith” for a pinning response to Luther’s attacks on the sacraments, had no interest in religious reform, whereas Martin Luther did. Henry’s motive was that of a personal matter only wanting his way concerning his divorce, while Martin Luther used his personal motive of reforming the church and making it widespread with his beliefs. One of Martin Luther’s
Hitchens is very anti-religious and is a well-known atheist. This is something that they differ in, I believe that Emerson doesn’t think there is a higher power but isn’t sure what, while Hitchens is anti-religious completely. They did differ in their views on charity for the most part, since Hitchens still believed there should be some, but it isn’t the duty of himself, it was the duty of the government. Emerson for the most part would have like Christopher Hitchens for his views on religion and consistency alone. Hitchens tended to be inconsistent on his view of war And the Bush administration making him a person who changed his mind based on what he though was right, which is what Emerson thought was
For starters, Antigone does not care about the law when she feels the law is wrong. Second, she has the impression that Creon is trying to play god and she makes it known when she tells him “Sorry who made this edict? Was it god? / Isn’t a man’s right to burial decreed / By divine justice? I don’t consider your / Pronouncements so important that they can / Just…overrule the unwritten laws of heaven.