1. Martin Luther was not excommunicated for exposing corruption, but for promoting many heresies. (
LINK)
Also, on indulgences (from
here):
The idea of a “restoration” being needed just before the “Reformation” also seems improbable. This common idea is based on the "selling" of indulgences [
1,
2,
3] (Martin Luther attacks the practice multiple times in his Ninety-Five Theses), but is mostly due to a misunderstanding. Again, the Protestant understanding usually relies on the assault of characters: people like
Johann Tetzel are demonized -- perhaps rightfully -- for abusing the system. But this abuse was not a doctrinal problem of the Church; rather, it was a disciplinary problem of men. Indulgences simply remove the temporal punishment due for past sin -- they are not a "Get out of Hell free" card -- and even when they were "sold," they required some sort of penance. Indulgences only have a salvatory effectiveness (remittance of time in Purgatory) if the recipient is already destined for Heaven. So, it would seem that the fuss is all about nothing.
2. Indeed, it was chronicled.
See writings of the Church Fathers.
3. "The procedure for electing the pope has evolved over the history of the Church. In the early centuries, the clergy and people of Rome elected the successor, who usually had worked very closely with the previous pope." (
See more.)