Neither Cajetan nor Luther supported polygamy all round. They supported it for kings because in Scripture most of the kings of Israel, including David, had many wives. This allowed them to cement alliances with marriage and guarantee a successor. So they supported it for kings only.
Neither Cajetan nor Luther supported polygamy all round. They supported it for kings because in Scripture most of the kings of Israel, including David, had many wives. This allowed them to cement alliances with marriage and guarantee a successor. So they supported it for kings only.
I can see the sense in supporting polygamy only for kings. Henry VIII practised serial polygamy in his search for a male heir. And Marie Antoinette was married to the Dauphin to cement a French-Austrian alliance. A Catholic monarch seeking friendly relations with a neighbouring country could contract only one such marriage.
John of Leiden was a very different case, being the sort of guy who gave religious loonies a bad name. No wonder that both Lutheran and Catholic rulers clamped down on Anabaptists.
Neither Cajetan nor Luther supported polygamy all round. They supported it for kings because in Scripture most of the kings of Israel, including David, had many wives. This allowed them to cement alliances with marriage and guarantee a successor. So they supported it for kings only.
I can see the sense in supporting polygamy only for kings. Henry VIII practised serial polygamy in his search for a male heir. And Marie Antoinette was married to the Dauphin to cement a French-Austrian alliance. A Catholic monarch seeking friendly relations with a neighbouring country could contract only one such marriage.
John of Leiden was a very different case, being the sort of guy who gave religious loonies a bad name. No wonder that both Lutheran and Catholic rulers clamped down on Anabaptists.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnster_rebellion