We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

Martin Luther Trial

The whole doc is available only for registered users

A limited time offer! Get a custom sample essay written according to your requirements urgent 3h delivery guaranteed

Order Now

Within the past two weeks as we were working on the trial, we were to learn whether or not Martin Luther was guilty and if we were to defend him or work against him. From all of the research that i’ve gathered and the things that I have learned, I believe that the defendant Martin Luther is in fact guilty. I believe this because the definition of heresy proves it so, indulgences are okay to sell, and Charles V labeled him a heretic.

One reason the Martin Luther did commit heresy is that what he did fit in the definition of heresy. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of heresy is ‘an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards.’ The catholic church was the generally accepted belief during the 1400s. So by that general definition of heresy, Martin Luther was a heretic. He had a published doctrine to show that he had a contrary belief to the catholic church. Deeming him, a heretic. A second reason that Martin Luther committed heresy is that in the 95 Theses, he said that indulgences weren’t okay to sell. When in fact, they were perfectly fine to sell. You could still confess your sins without paying money, but people still chose to pay money. That means the Luther said a false statement about the church, which falls back into the definition of heresy proving that he in fact was a heretic.

The third and final reason that Luther was a heretic is that Charles V labeled him a heretic and banned his writing. After just reading his writing, Charles banned all of his writings, because he knew that they were wrong. There are already other people saying he is a heretic, which contributes to the definition and him violating the church with his writings.

So think about it, after having his writings read and getting them banned, the definition of heresy proving that he is a heretic, and going against the church in his writings, doesn’t that prove that he in fact is, a heretic? I’ve given you the evidence, now it’s time for you the reader to reflect and see that this man is guilty for what he was done, and is in fact, a heretic.

Related Topics

We can write a custom essay

According to Your Specific Requirements

Order an essay
Materials Daily
100,000+ Subjects
2000+ Topics
Free Plagiarism
All Materials
are Cataloged Well

Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website. If you need this or any other sample, we can send it to you via email.

By clicking "SEND", you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy. We'll occasionally send you account related and promo emails.
Sorry, but only registered users have full access

How about getting this access

Your Answer Is Very Helpful For Us
Thank You A Lot!


Emma Taylor


Hi there!
Would you like to get such a paper?
How about getting a customized one?

Can't find What you were Looking for?

Get access to our huge, continuously updated knowledge base

The next update will be in:
14 : 59 : 59