Most Holy Father, prostrate at the feet of your Holiness, I offer myself with all that I am and have . . . I will acknowledge thy voice as the voice of Christ.
(Letter to Pope Leo X, May 30, 1518)
The true Antichrist, according to Paul, reigns in the Roman Court: I think I am able to prove that he [the Pope] is now worse than the Turks.
(Letter to Wenceslaus Link, December 11, 1518)
I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted . . . It is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better.
(Letter to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519)
German monk who couldn't control his libido along with his hatred of the Jews, "The Jews and their Lies" as well as Catholics, about who he begrudingly admitted:
"We are obliged to yield many things to the Papists[sic] - that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it." Commentary on St. John, ch. 16.,
wouldn't condemn polygamy:
I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture.
(De Wette, vol. 2, 459)
and penned the following gems:
"... one finds many a stubborn wife like that who will not give in, and who cares not a whit whether her husband fans into the sin of unchastity ten times over. Here it is time for the husband to say 'if you will not, another will; the maid will come if the wife will not."
"If women grow weary or even die while bearing children, that does no harm. Let them bear children to death, that's what they're there for."
"Men have broad shoulders and narrow hips, and accordingly they possess intelligence. Women have narrow shoulders and broad hips. Women ought to stay at home; the way they were created indicates this, for they have broad hips and a wide fundament to sit upon."
As for pushing for the Bible to be available for all to read you conveniently fail to mention the work of Caedmon, a monk of Whitby, who, by the end of the seventh century had translated large portions of the Bible into the vernacular. Unlike Luther, Caedmon didn't edit Scripture to his liking. Nor do you mention the translations of the Venerable Bede; Eadhelm, Bishop of Sherborne; Guthlac, of Peterborough; Egbert, Bishop of Holy Island; King Alfred the Great; Aelfric, Archbishop of Canterbury; the Book of Durham; Rushworth Gloss; the paraphrase of Orm; Salus Anime; William Shoreham and Richard Rolle, et al. Nor do you mention the words of St. Thomas More, as Lord Chancellor of England under Henry VIII:
"The whole Bible long before Wycliff's day was by virtuous and well-learned men translated into the English tongue, and by good and godly people with devotion and soberness well and reverently read. ... The clergy keep no Bibles from the laity but such translations as be either not yet approved for good, or such as already reproved for naught as Wycliff's was. For, as for old ones that were before Wycliff's days, they remain lawful and be in some folks' hand. I myself have seen, and can show you, Bibles, fair and old, which have been known and seen by the bishop of the diocese, and kept in laymen's hands and women's too, such as he knew for good and Catholic folk, that used them with soberness and devotion."
(Dialogues III)
Nor do you mention that the Bible was translated into Spanish, Italian, Danish, French, Norwegian, Polish, Bohemian and Hungarian prior to the invention of the printing press. Nor do you mention that Gutenberg, a Catholic, used his invention, the printing press, to print the Bible, the original 73 book canon which the Catholic Church closed in 405 AD, in Latin, as his first publication.
Yes, indeed, Luther is certainly someone worthy of your admiration.
No, ... just tired of seeing someone do a revisionist hatchet job on Luther. If it weren't for him, even you'd lack a Bible to read as well as knowing (if you care to be saved) that it is faith that will save you not works or praying to dead people. It is ONLY the living God that is to be worshipped. And of course money making schemes like Indulgences would be standard practice. Don't fret other indulgences have taken it's place such as the ongoing molestation problems with priests ... now you know where your tithes are going ... etc..
As for your hateful, false, propaganda on Luther ... you are certainly free to believe whatever you choose. Facts or truth don't hinder what they believe. For example, some still believe Bill Clinton was a God fearing man! Or that Hillary is the ultimate selfless victim of a right wing conspiracy.
Unfortunately unrevisionist history and evidence says differently - just as the same is true for Martin Luther. Sad but true, the Catholic church selectively shows it's unChrist like vitriol to those who chose to believe what God says over the "church". I'm fortunate that I don't have that hatred for you as I see that your church has taught you to display towards me and people like Luther.
Any "church" is bound to be problematic when it depends on mere fallible mortals, spiritually or otherwise, that deviate from the Bible. That statement extends to ANY one claiming to be a "Christian".
Take care but for your own sake, don't revel in demolishing the reputation of others who have lead countless people to be saved. I'm sure Luther didn't walk on water either. No mere mortal does. However he certainly isn't the monster that you have painted. Shame on you.