Technically, ALL churches "sell salvation to people".
I'm not sure what "technicality" you are referring to here, however, I don't really care who or what it is that claims they can "sell salvation." If they do, I reject them because no one has that right, nor do they have that ability. So, I stand by what I said in regard to Luther being justified in taking a stand against such a practice.
But that's not what Luther was opposing. Tetzel was playing fast and loose with the practice of indulgences, and clouded the practice. The practice is this: prayer, fasting and almsgiving for the remission of sins of those in purgatory.
Nothing remotely Biblical about any of that either. So, I would still agree with opposing it.
Tetzel was teaching that you could give a donation to the church and get out of purgatory for doing so. Tetzel was wrong, Luther tried to get something done about it.
Indeed, Tetzel was wrong. However, Luther's problem with the Catholic Church went far beyond just Tetzel.
But it was never the teaching of the Church that you can buy your way into heaven.
That's debatable. In any case, Tetzel aside (and he does, quite conveniently, get all the blame), the Church was very much teaching that you can
earn your way into heaven. No surprise therefore that perhaps certain people took such teaching just a step further.
You know that if the shepherd leads the sheep down the wrong path, it's the shepherd that pays the price, not the sheep.
Actually, I would say both the shepherd
and the sheep pay the price for going down the "wrong path."
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." -
Matthew 15:14
The fact is that if you pray, fast, and give charity, God will allow for some remission of your sins on earth.
Sounds like works based salvation to me. I'll stick with what the Bible teaches, which is that Christ's blood, poured out on the cross of Calvary, is completely sufficient to purge my sins entirely. Those things you listed are, for the Christian, already saved, our "good and reasonable service." (Romans 12:1)
Well, it wasn't a 'lie sold by Rome'. Rome asked for donations to build St. Peter's.
I'm sure that is exactly how Rome likes to spin the story now, washing their hands like Pilate. However, the very fact that the lie, which at the very least, was sold in their name, did not offend them or disgust them enough to prevent them from using the money collected in such a diabolical way to build St. Peter's, tells us their consciences weren't too badly troubled after all.
I wish every single person, Christian or not, who goes to see that "beautiful" structure, could really and truly understand one of the main reasons it is even there to begin with. That Basilica, for all its earthly charm and magnificence, is built on the souls of untold thousands who were in fact lied to in the worst way anyone could ever imagine. Rome did not care enough about that to actually do anything to seek some kind of restitution. They used that money without any apparent qualms or guilt regarding all those people sold a lie about their salvation.
It was a struggle. Tetzel tried to get more money by offering incentives he had no authority to offer.
Yes, what Tetzel did was wicked, but it does not excuse the Church that he represented from their own wickedness.
I agree with you, which is why I like to see more reform. The Church needs to reform every day, and never lose sight of that fact.
The Church needs to cling to the truth of the Gospel and God's word. We are in a spiritual battle and we cannot afford to be naive or complacent.