Different reformation: Belief vs good works

[Max Sinister]

IOTL, the catholic church stated until the reformation and afterwards that those people who do good works will go directly to heaven (other than the Orthodox church, AFAIK). As we all know, this concept was misused in that a) the church decided that buying indulgences is a good deed in itself, no matter what the church uses it for and b) you could even buy indulgences for deceased people. Now came Martin Luther who stated that only the belief is what will help you to come to paradise, by the grace of god.

But WI it had been different - the Catholic church decides (either earlier in history, or at the council of Konstanz, where Hus was burned) that belief counts more than good works, but after the invention of the printing press, when time is ripe for a reformation, people bring up the idea that good works, especially charity and help for the poor, are essentially. What kind of religious development could happen after that?

 

[Max Sinister]

No ideas, comments, whatever? Are religious PODs that boring?

 

[Fabilius]

I find the idea of good works bringing you to heaven actually more rational, since it just doesn´t make sense to condemn souls to hell for not having heard of Jesus. I think this idea is actually more popular in protestan countries than the idea of belief saves.

This could lead to a much better world I think...

 

[Max Sinister]

I also prefer the "good works are more important" approach. But how different would such a work be? A socialist movement based on the teachings of a religious minority?

 

[Jasen777]

But WI it had been different - the Catholic church decides (either earlier in history, or at the council of Konstanz, where Hus was burned) that belief counts more than good works, but after the invention of the printing press, when time is ripe for a reformation, people bring up the idea that good works, especially charity and help for the poor, are essentially. What kind of religious development could happen after that?

Did you mean essential, or did you leave something out?

Sorry, I'm just trying to understand what you're getting at. You have the Roman Catholic church coming to the position that faith is more important than works (I'm really don't see them going all they way to sola fida), and then a reformation that stresses the importance of works and is a socialist type movement?

Oh, and I am a newb, so I hope all my acronyms are right.

To get your scenario, I would suggest a POD that sees students at Oxford spreading the ideas of Wycliffe further than IOTL. IOTL Bohemian students who went to Oxford took Wycliffe's teachings back home with them and were a huge influence of Hus.

So ITTL, multiple Hus type figures emerge and Wycliffism becomes popular enough that a compromise is reached with pervious Catholic doctrine, and an official council declares the primary importance of faith (I suspect this would be a very messy process though).

Then instead of instead of a reformation based upon Luther's reading of Romans 1:17 ("the just shall live by faith as in OTL, a reformation is launched inspired by James 2:24 "by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" and also by a socialist ethos inspired by the account of the early church in Acts 2.

I could see such a formulations becoming popular among the peasantry and various places, as they often suffered oppression at the hands of both the nobles and the established church. This would include the types of people who took part in the Anabaptist movements and/or the Peasant Revolts in the OTL.

The problem is that such a movement, given the times, would have to be supported by force of arms to survive. IOTL, Lutheranism survived because it had the support of several German Princes, and even then it would likely have been crushed if Spain and France had gotten along better.

Since princes aren't likely to support the kind of reformation you outlined, I think the best chance for it's survival would be if it garnered the support of some Swiss Cantons, who may suited to provide defense for such a reformation.

 

[Max Sinister]

Did you mean essential, or did you leave something out?

Sorry, I'm just trying to understand what you're getting at. You have the Roman Catholic church coming to the position that faith is more important than works (I'm really don't see them going all they way to sola fida), and then a reformation that stresses the importance of works and is a socialist type movement?

That's exactly what I meant. And yes, such a movement is more likely to flourish in the cantons or similar...

 

[NapoleonXIV]

That's exactly what I meant. And yes, such a movement is more likely to flourish in the cantons or similar...

But would it get out of them? How much appeal would it have to the new and rising merchant class, who now could see in their wealth God's "elect" manifesting his favor, rather than the needle they must pass thru to get into heaven?

Force of arms costs money. Princes had to support wealthy merchants who in turn enabled them to buy mercernaries. Little profit accrues to good works, whether done or bought, but belief costs nothing and can enable prosperity.

 

[Jasen777]

Some people find works based religion more comforting, because it can offer a more objective standard for being justified. Many struggle with doubt and wonder if they really believe, or if they believe well enough.

This reformation wouldn't be as radical as the early church in Acts 2 or true socialism. In the republican-type Swiss cantons it could be less radical than outbreaks elsewhere. With the incompetent run of Popes at the time, the threat of the Ottomans, and the rivalry between the Hapsburgs and the French, and with more radical movements to stamp out (such as a big peasant revolt in Germany) this more moderate wing could survive. Swiss mercenaries were quite popular, so they could have a fairly significant force if they fought for their cantons instead.