Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2001 :: February ::
Re: Wittenberg and Paris
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0338  Tuesday, 13 February 2001

[1]     From:   Melissa D. Aaron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 12 Feb 2001 08:11:43 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris

[2]     From:   Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 12 Feb 2001 08:30:09 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris

[3]     From:   Jack Heller <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 12 Feb 2001 19:17:53 +0000 (GMT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris

[4]     From:   Graham Bradshaw <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:04:51 +0900
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Melissa D. Aaron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 12 Feb 2001 08:11:43 -0800
Subject: 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris

Much of this argument strikes me as largely based on emotional
commitment (on both sides) and hence impossible to resolve, but I would
like to point out a small error in fact:

>And wasn't it an Augustinian church upon which Luther's theses were
>hammered?  Augustine that representative of man who acted out most of
>the so-called sins in his own life only to confess for absolution later
>and tax the rest of us with the impurity of his elderly disgust for the
>earthly pleasures. Luther smelt the dirty sin of hypocrisy.

Augustine is one of the Church doctors who emphasized atonement--the
complete and total forgiveness of sins.  In fact, if I remember, his
model was legal:  You have a debt, I pay the debt for you, the debt is
now discharged and you then are (or are not) appreciative.  It's
sometimes been pointed out that Luther was a good Augustinian monk
himself and saw in the doctrine of indulgences a limiting of the concept
of grace which was 1) counter to Augustinian/Anselmian theology and 2)
psychologically unsettling--a system in which small sins and small
consequences begin to obsess the believer; a condition technically known
as scrupulosity.  As annoyed as Luther was, I don't remember any
evidence at all that he rejected Augustine.

Please feel free to correct any errors I have made--

MD Aaron

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 12 Feb 2001 08:30:09 -0800
Subject: 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0323 Re: Wittenberg and Paris

Marcus Dahl writes:

>And wasn't it an Augustinian church upon which Luther's theses were
>hammered?  Augustine that representative of man who acted out most of
>the so-called sins in his own life only to confess for absolution later
>and tax the rest of us with the impurity of his elderly disgust for the
>earthly pleasures. Luther smelt the dirty sin of hypocrisy.

Maybe he did, but it's speculation, since I don't recall that he ever
rejected Augustine.

Cheers,
Se

 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.