Reformation was not necessarily bad, as Martin Luther merely intended to reform the Church from within. Protestantism as it happened, however, was. It destroyed (or at least heavily shook) the moral authority of the Church and destroyed the religious unity of the West. All of these had massive negative consequences:
Ever heard of the Borgia popes? The Roman Catholic church, as an institution, had squandered its "moral authority" already. The success of Protestantism (relative to previous dissenting movements) was a consequence, not a cause, there.
Witch hunts only became possible because Church had lost its moral authority. Church, in fact, was against the witch hunts and even the concept of witches as such, because only God can perform miracles.
That's... not actually true.
There are ranks of created beings way above humans in this universe. We call them angels.
We are not alone.
God has set limits on what the fallen angels (Satan and his gang) are allowed to do, but they are far from powerless in the physical world.
Witchcraft was treated as an illusion. But in the Early Modern period, Church gradually lost its authority. This started well before the Reformation - Pope Innocent allowed the Inquisition to pursue witches in 1484. - but was a symptom of the spirit of Reformation. Some 90% witches were killed in Protestant countries IIRC.
Probably because the parts of Europe where belief in "witchcraft" was endemic happened to be the areas that went Protestant?
Maybe in part because the people there had this
problem that the papacy just pretended didn't exist?
Now, I'm sure we all know that most of the people accused of being witches were in fact innocent of any such thing. But to simply deny that it's possible at all for wicked humans to be getting power from the forces of darkness?
Dude, read the Bible more.
Until the Reformation, Catholic Church still provided a moral and even practical barrier to conflict in Europe. It helped unite Europe against the external threat - both John and Matthias Hunyadi received most of the help from the Pope, both direct and indirect. It also provided some protection for the noncombatants. But with Reformation, all of this disappeared. Thirty Years War started as a religious war, and was easily one of the bloodiest conflicts to have ever been fought in Europe, all the way up until World War I.
Sorry, no. The RCC in the roughly 500 years between the pope first claiming to be the universal leader of all Christians everywhere, and the time when the kings of Europe decided to take the pope's toys away, was a driving force in declaring war, genocidal war, against anyone who rejected its dogmas.
Go ask the Waldesians how much of a barrier to conflict the RCC was. Or the Cathars, or... oh wait you can't, because they are all dead.
Protestants also abandoned the monastic way of life. Which was a bad thing: monasteries are good for the soul, as the place of quiet contemplation. But they were also a place of learning, and provided support for the communities in terms of knowledge and resources alike.
I hear you. Something like that might develop again, given time. In fact, the desire of various Protestant fringe groups to go and set up their own little community somewhere, apart from the worldly world, looks to me like an expression of the same impulse behind the monastic orders.
That being said, I think you need to understand what many of those institutions had degenerated into, to see why they had to go. Did you think that the problem the RCC has with its infestation of pedogays is a modern one?
Actually, there are reports of this (and denunciations of it) going back a long way. Like the 12th century!
When the RCC clergy won't stop sodomizing small children, I don't want their "moral authority" preserved, I want it burned to the ground!
Reformation was also a massive assault on the culture. Compare the Gothic or Orthodox cathedrals to Protestant churches. Protestantism essentially started the mindless campaign against beauty, against culture, which was later taken over by the Marxists and lasts even today in the West. I have only seen photos of Protestant churches, but one common thread is that they are all soulless.
Well, having personally been inside a fair number of church buildings, of various denominations, I don't share your impression there.
One of my minor interests is trying to guess the denomination of a church building from the shape of it. Anglican churches have a certain look to them. Dutch Reformed ones are quite different, and in a way that seems thematic too. Roman Catholic ones look different too. As do Baptist ones.
Of course we have many denominations now that are too young to have yet developed their own style of architecture, so I can't tell you what a typical Pentecostal church building looks like, for example. But give it time.
Anyway, I think your feelings about church buildings are subjective.
