Pius X: "Protestantism as proudly called by its founders, is the sum of all the heresies, that have been before it, after it, and that could still be born to slaughter the souls"

On a web page entitled, Martin Luther: The greatest heretic in human history comes the following quote from Pope Pius X:  

“Protestantism as proudly called by its founders, is the sum of all the heresies, that have been before it, after it, and that could still be born to slaughter the souls” -Pius X

I was curious to see this quote in its original context, especially in light of the current Pope and the trend in ecumenism the Magisterium has engaged in since the twentieth century. For instance, see my post from a few years ago: Pope Francis and Martin Luther. While many of Rome's defenders battle in cyber space to stomp out the "Protestant Revolt," Pope Francis willingly received a statue of Luther at the Vatican and is saying things like, "With gratitude we acknowledge that the Reformation helped give greater centrality to sacred Scripture in the Church’s life." If you were a faithful Roman Catholic between 1903 and 1914, Pope Pius X seems like he's saying something a bit different about the Reformation than Pope Francis in the twenty-first century. Let's take a look at the quote from Pius X and make sure it says what it's purported to say.    

 

Documentation

The web page in which I found this quote does not provide a reference, nor did any of the others I came across in my cursory search with this exact wording. However, there are other versions of the quote that offered up helpful clues:   

"Protestantism, or Reformed religion, as proudly called by its founders, is the sum of all heresies that have been before it, that have been after it, and that still could be born to slaughter souls." St. Pius X, ora pro nobis. (link)

This same catechism (p. 398) states “Protestantism * * * is the sum of all Heresies. The most monstrous congeries of errors, both private and individual, and enfolds all heresies.” (link)

“Protestantism, or the reformed religion, as its founders haughtily call it, is the sum of all heresies that ever existed before it, that have arisen since, or that may arise hereafter for the ruin of souls" (link)

From these texts I was able to determine the primary source: Compendio della dottrina cristiana prescritto da sua Santita Papa Pio X. As one of the texts above states, this was a 1905 Catechism by Pope Pius X.  The quote is found on page 398 of the 1906 edition. 

Context

128. Fra le altre, vanno tristamente famose le eresie: di Sabellio, che impugnò il dogma della SS. Trinità; di Manete, che negò l'Unità di Dio, ed ammise nell'uomo due anime; di Ario, che non volle riconoscere la Divinità di N. S. Gesù Cristo; di Nestorio, che negò a Maria SSma la sua eccelsa qualità di Madre di Dio, e distinse in Gesù Cristo due persone; di Eutiche, il quale in Gesù Cristo non ammise che una sola natura; di Macedonio, che combattè la divinità dello Spirito Santo; di Pelagio, che intaccò il dogma del peccato originale e della necessità della grazia; degli Iconoclasti, che ripudiarono il culto delle Sacre Imagini e delle Reliquie dei Santi; di Berengario, che disdisse la presenza reale di N. S. Gesù Cristo nel SS. Sacramento; di Giovanni Hus, che negò il primato di S. Pietro e del Romano Pontefice; e finalmente la grande eresia del Protestantesimo (sec. XVI), prodotta e divulgata principalmente da Lutero e da Calvino. Questi novatori, col respingere la Tradizione divina riducendo tutta la rivelazione alla S. Scrittura, e col sottrarre la S. Scrittura medesima al legittimo magistero della Chiesa, per darla insensatamente alla libera interpretazione dello spirito privato di ciascheduno, demolirono tutti i fondamenti della fede, esposero i Libri Santi alla profanazione della presunzione e dell'ignoranza, ed aprirono l'adito a tutti gli errori.

129. Il protestantesimo o religione riformata, come orgogliosamente la chiamarono i suoi fondatori, è la somma di tutte le eresie, che furono prima di esso, che sono state dopo, e che potranno nascere ancora a fare strage delle anime.

Conclusion

Yes, the quote says Protestantism is the sum of all heresies that have been before it, that have been after it and that it's a soul killer. The quote is found in an appendix to the Catechism which discusses church history (Breve Storia Della Religione). In #128 (above), Luther and Calvin are specifically singled out for rejecting "divine Tradition" "reducing all revelation to Scripture," and interpreting Scripture without the Roman Magisterium. The quote then follows in #129.  It's interesting that this Catechism is found in various places online (translated into English), but this section does not appear (see, for instance, EWTN's version and this print version). The 1905 Catechism was revised and rereleased in 1912. "The history of the Christian religion" appendix section does occur in the revision, but it appears the appendices are left off at times.  I don't suspect any nefarious purposeful deletions. Rather, it appears the Catechism section has more pragmatic value. 

The Catechism also has some other interesting tidbits: 

Q. What should a Christian do who has been given a Bible by a Protestant or by an agent of the Protestants? A Christian to whom a Bible has been offered by a Protestant or an agent of the Protestants should reject it with disgust, because it is forbidden by the Church. If it was accepted by inadvertence, it must be burnt as soon as possible or handed in to the Parish Priest.

D. Che dovrebbe fare il cristiano se gli venisse offerta la Bibbia da un protestante o da qualche emissario dei protestanti? R. Se ad un cristiano venisse offerta la Bibbia da un protestante, o da qualche emissario dei protestanti, egli dovrebbe rigettarla con orrore, perché proibita dalla Chiesa; che se l'avesse ricevuta senza badarvi, dovrebbe tosto gettarla alle fiamme, o consegnarla al proprio parroco.[source]

Q. Why does the Church forbid Protestant Bibles? A. The Church forbids Protestant Bibles because, either they have been altered and contain errors, or not having her approbation and footnotes explaining the obscure meanings, they may be harmful to the Faith. It is for that same reason that the Church even forbids translations of the Holy Scriptures already approved by her which have been reprinted without the footnotes approved by her.

D. Perché la Chiesa proibisce le Bibbie protestanti? R. La Chiesa proibisce la Bibbie protestanti perché o sono alterate e contengono errori, oppure, mancando della sua approvazione e delle note dichiarative dei sensi oscuri, possono nuocere alla Fede. Per questo la Chiesa proibisce eziandio le traduzioni della Sacra Scrittura già approvate da essa, ma ristampate senza le spiegazioni dalla medesima approvate. [source]

Pope Pius was not tolerant of ecumenism towards Protestants. He lumped all Protestants in with "modernism," that movement of liberalism within theology that infiltrated the ivory towers of academia (philosophy, history, sciences), most particularly Roman Catholic scholarship. Protestantism, according to Pius X, was that movement that ushered in the destruction of religion. Pius also called modernism the "sum" or "synthesis" of all heresies. Despite these attributes, J.N.D. Kelly refers to him as "deeply conservative" and "one of the most constructive reforming popes." Kelly also calls him "A man of transparent goodness and humility" [The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, 314].

Luther openly acknowledged the rapid decline in morals that his new religion was bringing about?

Here's a snippet from one of Rome's defenders on the failure of the Reformation:

Luther openly acknowledged the rapid decline in morals that his new religion was bringing about: "Luther quite candidly admitted the distressing state of things described above without in the least glossing it over, which indeed he could not well have done; in fact, his own statements give us an even clearer insight into the seamy side of life in his day. He speaks of the growing disorders with pain and vexation; the more so since he could not but see that they were being fomented by his doctrine of justification by faith alone. "This preaching,"; he says, "ought by rights to be accepted and listened to with great joy, and everyone ought to improve himself thereby and become more pious. But, unfortunately, the reverse is now the case and the longer it endures the worse the world becomes; this is [the work of] the devil himself, for now we see the people becoming more infamous, more avaricious, more unmerciful, more unchaste and in every way worse than they were under Popery."

The basic gist is that Luther admitted his teaching ("his doctrine of justification by faith alone") made people worse. This is a typical charge, often argued by Rome's defenders that Luther was vexed and agonized that his teaching made things worse. If Luther's teachings really were from God, wouldn't they make people better? Wouldn't they make the world better? Even though I've covered this quote before, let's take a fresh look and see what Luther was saying about his evangelical teachings and their impact on the world.

Documentation

While no documentation is provided, Rome's defender mentioned the old Roman Catholic biographer Hartmann Grisar a few times. A quick Google search reveals the quote came from Grisar's multi-volume biography of Luther. In volume 4:210, Grisar states, 

Luther quite candidly admitted the distressing state of things described above without in the least glossing it over, which indeed he could not well have done; in fact, his own statements give us an even clearer insight into the seamy side of life in his day. He speaks of the growing disorders with pain and vexation; the more so since he could not but see that they were being fomented by his doctrine of justification by faith alone.

“This preaching,” he says, “ought by rights to be accepted and listened to with great joy, and everyone ought to improve himself thereby and become more pious. But, unfortunately, the reverse is now the case and the longer it endures the worse the world becomes; this is [the work of] the devil himself, for now we see the people becoming more infamous, more avaricious, more unmerciful, more unchaste and in every way worse than they were under Popery.”[3]

[3] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 1², p. 14, “Hauspostille.”

Grisar's original text was in German. He provides a helpful reference: ""Werke,” Erl. ed., 1², p. 14, “Hauspostille.”"  Here is Werke Erl. ed., 1², p. 14. The text reads, 

“Hauspostille” refers to the House Postil. The House Postil sermons were delivered by Luther at his house (the old monastery) to his friends and family between 1531 - 1535.  These sermons were not written by Luther, but were put together by two of Luther's associates  (Veit Dietrich and Georg Roerer). In many cases, two versions of the sermons exist, as is the case with this text. The text Grisar is citing is Veit Dietrich's. His account can be found in English in Dr. Martin Luther's House-Postil, in the First Sunday in Advent sermon (Matthew 21:1-9). Roerer's version can be found in The Complete Sermons of Martin Luther Volume 5 (Michigan: Baker Books, 2000) pp. 25-30. Both accounts are very similar, except that Dietrich's is longer, containing additional material at the end. We'll be primarily utilizing the English translation in which the quote in question can be found here, but also referring to Roerer's version also. 

Context

Luther first explains how the Jews expected a grand powerful king, not a meek man riding on a donkey. They expected a man of might and power like all earthly rulers. A king who could provide earthly riches and power, thrusting the Jews to a powerful place over all the nations. Rather, this man on a donkey had a different power: the forgiveness of sin and everlasting life:

For we are all poor sinners, but in baptism, and afterwards in our whole life, if we turn unto Christ, He comforts us, and says: Give me your sins and take my righteousness and holiness; let your death be taken from you, and put on my life. This is, properly speaking, the Lord Jesus' government. For all His office and work is this, that He daily takes away our sin and death, and clothes us with His righteousness and life. [Dietrich''s version]

Luther explains that a king with such extraordinary gifts should be most coveted, yet it is not:

"This announcement we should indeed hear with great joy, and every one should thereby be bettered and made more holy. But alas, the contrary is true, and the world grows worse as it grows older, becoming the very Satan himself, as we see that the people are now more dissolute, avaricious, unmerciful, impure and wicked than previously under the papacy." [Dietrich''s version]

"We must certainly receive this message eagerly and gratefully, by it becoming more pious and godly. Unfortunately there's the opposite side, that by this teaching the world becomes more and more hostile, wicked, and malicious; yet not through the fault of the teaching but of the people, thanks to the pernicious devil and death. Today people are possessed by seven devils, whereas before it was only one. The devil now bulldozes the people so that even under the bright light of the gospel they become greedier, slyer, more covetous, crueler, lewder, more insolent and ill-tempered than before under the papacy." [Roerer's version]

Notice in Roerer's version, Luther doesn't blame his teaching, but the people and ultimately Satan.
Luther goes on to say:

What causes this? Nothing else than that the people disregard this preaching, do not use it aright for their own conversion and amendment, that is, for the comfort of their conscience, and thankfulness for the grace and benefit of God in Christ; but every one is more concerned for money and goods, or other worldly matters, than for this precious treasure which Christ brings us. For the most of us, when we do not feel our misery, the fear of sin and death, would rather, like the Jews, have such a king in Christ as would give us riches and ease here on earth, than that we should comfort ourselves in Him in the midst of poverty, crosses, wretchedness, fear and death. The world takes no delight in this, and because the gospel and Christ do not give it what it desires, it will have nothing to do with Christ and the gospel.[Dietrich's version]

"Why so? Not through fault of the teaching but because the message is not met with thankful acceptance; people cast it to the wind and pay more attention to money and goods than to the blessed treasure which our Lord Christ brings to us." [Roerer's version]

In harmony with his earlier points, he explains people seek after earthly riches, not heavenly riches. Most people want the same powerful king the Jews expected, not the foolishness of Christ. With a pastoral heart, Luther warns:

Therefore our Lord in turn rebukes this world and says: Do you not rejoice in this, nor thank me, that through the sufferings and death of my only begotten Son, I take away your sins and death? Then I will give you sin and death enough, since you want it so; and where you were possessed of and tormented by only one devil, you shall now be tormented by seven that are worse. We see farmers, citizens and all orders, from the highest to the lowest, guilty of shameful avarice, inordinate life, impurity and other vices. Therefore let every one who would be a Christian be hereby warned as of God himself, joyfully and thankfully to hear and receive this announcement, and also pray to God to give him a strong faith, that he may hold fast this doctrine; then surely the fruit will follow, that he will daily become more humble, obedient, gentle, chaste and pious. For this doctrine is of a character to make godly, chaste, obedient, pious people. [Dietrich''s version]

Luther states those who accept this gospel will have fruit follow and "will daily become more humble, obedient, gentle, chaste and pious. For this doctrine is of a character to make godly, chaste, obedient, pious people." Then there are those who will not accept the gospel:

But those who will not gladly receive it, become seven times worse than they were before they heard it, as we see everywhere. And the hour will surely come when God will punish this unthankfulness. Then it will appear what the world has merited by it. Now, since the Jews would not obey the prophet, it is told to us that our King comes meek and lowly, in order that we may learn wisdom from their sad experience, and not be offended by His poverty, nor look for worldly pomp and riches, like the Jews; but learn that in Christ we have a King who is the Just One and Savior, and willing to help us from sin and eternal death. This announcement, I say, we should receive with joy, and with hearty thanks to God, else we must take the devil, with walling, weeping and gnashing of teeth." [Dietrich''s version]

Conclusion

Was the world getting worse because of Luther's "new religion"? Yes! In context, it's the world which grows worse because of the gospel being preached. Those though who accept the gospel are transformed by the gospel. Luther consistently held that the gospel would find great opposition, and would be attacked from all sides. The gospel would be used by the world as a license to sin and all sorts of evil because of Satan. The gospel would indeed make those of the world worse, while changing the lives of those who accept it. Luther wasn't postmillennial. While he was discouraged that the world seemed to be getting worse, his eschatological expectation can be traced back even to the early days of his Reformation work. For Luther, it was the end of the world. Things were indeed going to get worse. The Gospel was going to be fought against by the Devil with all his might. The true church was a tiny flock in a battle against the world, the flesh, and the Devil. He hoped the people would improve with the preaching of the Gospel, he often admitted he knew things were going to get worse because of the Gospel.

Addendum

These two links are of vital importance for anyone attempting to understand how Luther's House Postil was put together:

Unravelling Luther’s House Postils, Part 1

Unravelling Luther’s House Postils, Part 2

Of interest is the author's conclusion that "Veit Dietrich was correct; he was the only one who transcribed the sermons Luther preached in his home in the early 1530s, though Rörer may have been in attendance to hear portions of some of them."

Bernard of Clairvaux: "Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary"

What is the purpose of Holy Scripture? According to this website, via a quote attributed to St. Bernard of Clairvaux, "Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary." This statement is part of a pro-Roman Catholic cumulative case of quotes from church history alleging to prove, "devotion to Mary is necessary for salvation." The page is representative of the worst of Roman Catholic propaganda: historical quotes devoid of references are used to bolster a pernicious Mariolatry. 

True, St. Bernard was known at times for excessive Mariology. It's ironic that Bernard's Marian views played a role in the sixteenth century Reformation.  Luther mentioned him a number of times, sometimes fondly, other times critical of his Mariology: that the church of his day put forth a warm and friendly Mary while Christ was portrayed as a harsh judge.  It's in the realm of possibility, therefore, that Bernard penned an excessive Marian comment. We'll see though, there is reason to doubt he wrote it. While some of Rome's defenders may believe "Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary," it doesn't help their credibility when they use spurious quotes from church history. Let's take a closer look.   

Documentation

In the link I utilized, no documentation is provided. However, in an 1948 English translation of a seventeenth century Roman Catholic work from Jean Eudes, comes the following:  

1. The all-surpassing love of God for Mary causes Him to become entirely hers: "My beloved to me;' by His thoughts, words and actions. By His thoughts, because she has been from all eternity the first object of His love, after the sacred humanity of His Word, and the first and worthiest subject of His thoughts and designs: "The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways." (4) By His words, because St. Bernard declares that the whole of Sacred Scripture was written "for Mary, about Mary and on account of Mary."(5) By His works, because everything that God has done in the world of nature, grace and glory, and everything He has accomplished in the God-Man and through Him is more for the sake of this admirable Virgin, than all other creatures together as He loves her alone above all His creatures.

 (4) Proverbs 8,22                                                                                                                                                         (5) De hac, et ob hanc, et propter hanc omnis Scriptura facta est. Serm. 1 in Salve.

The only difference in the English wording is the use of the word "sacred" rather than "holy." This text therefore may be the origination used to create this popular English version cyber-quote. This text from Jean Eudes was originally written in French in 1681:

The French version similarly provides Bernard's text in Latin (De hac, et ob hanc, et propter hanc omnis Scriptura facta est), and provides the same reference: "Serm. 1 in Salve." "Serm. 1" refers to "sermon one," while "in Salve" refers to "Salve Regina" (Hail, Holy Queen, Marian Hymn). The reference then is to St. Bernard's first sermon on the Salve Regina (there are four sermons in total).  When searching out this Latin text, I discovered Eudes was correct that the quote was from Bernard's Salve Regina sermon, but he was in error as to which one it was. It's from Bernard's third sermon, not the first.

Context 

2. Non solum autem coelum et firmamentum, Domina rerum intelligitur, sed aliis nominibus convenienter appellatur, et rerum vocabulis designatur. Ipsa tabernaculum Dei, ipsa templum, ipsa domus, ipsa atrium, ipsa cubiculum, ipsa thalamus, ipsa sponsa, ipsa filia, ipsa arca diluvii, arca testamenti, urna aurea, ipsa manna, virga Aaron, vellus Gedeonis, porta Ezechielis, civitas Dei, ipsa coelum, ipsa terra, ipsa sol, ipsa luna et stella matutina, aurora ipsa et lucerna, tuba et mons, fons quoque hortorum, et lilium convallium; desertum ipsa, et terra repromissionis lacte et melle manans, stella maris, navis quoque, via in mari, sagena, vinea, ager, arca, horreum, stabulum, praesepe subjugale, apotheca, aula, turris, castra, acies, populus, regnum, sacerdotium. Ovis est, pascua est, paradisus est, palma est, rosa est, fluvius est, potus est, columba est, columna est, vestis est, margarita est, candelabrum est, mensa est, corona est, sceptrum est, panis est, oleum est, vinum est, arbor est, virga est, cedrus est, cypressus est, platanus est, cinnamomum est, balsamum est, myrrha est, thus est, oliva est, nardus est, crocus est, fistula, calamus, et storax est, soror et mater est. Et ut breviter concludam, de hac et ob hanc, et propter hanc omnis Scriptura facta est, propter hanc totus mundus factus est, et haec gratia Dei plena est, et per hanc homo redemptus est, Verbum Dei caro factum est, Deus humilis, et homo sublimis.

A partial English translation can be found here:

“ O Lordess, Holy Mary, thou art heaven, earth, pasture, paradise, bread, drink, manna, oil, wine, cinnamon, balm, myrrh, frankincense, olive, spikenard, saffron, gum, a temple, a house, a bed-room, a bride, a lamp, a kingdom, a priesthood, a trumpet, a mountain, a wilderness, a field, a vine, a floor, a barr, a stable, a manger, a warehouse, a ball, a tower, a camp, an army, a bird, a palm, a rose, a river, a pigeon, a garment, a pearl, a candlestick, a table, a crown, a sceptre, a tree, a cedar, a cypress, a pipe, a reed, a daughter, a sister, a mother, a sun, a moon, a star, the city of God, the rod of Aaron, the fleece of Gideon, the gate of Ezekiel, the morning-star, the fountain of gardens, the lily of the valley, and the Land of Promise flowing with milk and honey.” 

And here:

His saintship, in the same elegant and edifying style, calls her ladyship, heaven, earth, pasture, paradise, bread, drink, manna, oil, wine, cinnamon, balm, myrrh, frankincense, olive, spikenard, saffron, gum, a temple, a house, a bed-room, a bride, a lamp, a trumpet, a mountain, a wilderness, a field, a vine, a floor, a barn, a stable, a manger, a warehouse, a hall, a tower, a camp, an army, a kingdom, a priesthood, a bird, a palm, a rose, a river, a pigeon, a garment, a pearl, a candlestick, a table, a crown, a sceptre, a tree, a cedar, a cypress, a reed, a daughter, a sister, a mother, a sun, a moon, a star, the city of God, the rod of Aaron, the fleece of Gideon, the gate of Ezekiel, the star of the morning, the fountain of gardens, the lily of the valley, and the land of promise flowing with milk and honey.

And here:

St. Bernard shows that the most orthodox faith finds no exaggeration in the words of the Rabbins, when he cries : 'It is for Mary that all Scripture has been made, for her the universe has been created. Full of grace, it is by her that the human race has been bought, the Word made flesh, God human and man God.'”.

Conclusion

The line that Eudes appears to be citing is "De hac, et ob hanc, et propter hanc omnis Scriptura facta est, propter hanc totus mundus factus est." This translates to, "The Scriptures were intended for her, and the world made for her sake." 

There is reason to doubt Bernard is the author of this quote. It's generally accepted that Bernard's four sermons on the Salve Regina are wrongly attributed to him. As far back as the seventeenth century, the Salve Regina sermons have been flagged as dubious. Jean Mabillon released a set of Bernard's collected works and included these sermons in his volume, Opera dubia, notha et supposititia (dubious, spurious, and inauthentic works).  In his 1891 Bibliographica Bernardina cataloging Bernard's writings, Leopold Janauschek lists the four Salve Regina sermons as falsely attributed to St. Bernard:

92. Sermones IV in (antiphonam) "Salve Regina" (qui Bernardum Totelanum auctorem habent).

Others have also noted the sermons are not from St. Bernard:

"And the spurious St. Bernard, “ De hac, et propter hanc omnis Scriptura facta est, propter hanc totus mundus factus est,” &c. "The Scriptures were intended for her, and the world made for her sake.'" (source)

"But, be this as it may, they cite the sermons on the Salve Regina, and represent St. Bernard as having said—“innocens fusti ab originalibus et ab actualibus peccatis—Thou wast innocent, oh Queen, of all sin, whether actual or original.” But, as to this, the answer is, that the four sermons on the Salve Regina, attributed in some old collectors to St. Bernard, so far from being known to be his, are quite indisputably recognized as the work of another, as may be seen in the preface to the Paris folio edition. This is an important fact.

(d) Although thus marked as spurious by their own highest authorities, (as in the late Benedictine edition, in large octavo, vol. iv. p. 1442,) would it be believed that this passage is quoted, at large, as St. Bernard's, in a book published in Boston (Patrick Donahoe, 1855,) and approved by Bishops Neuman and Fitzpatrick? The work abounds in similar deceptions." (source)

Here's an irony I came across while looking into this quote: not only is the quote used unchecked to promote Mariology, it's also used by Rome's detractors to combat Mariolatry. When I first saw the quote, I immediately placed it in the "this quote sounds too good to be true" category... which provoked me to track it down.  Protestant apologists / lay-apologists are also responsible for the arguments they use against Roman Catholicism. If Protestants also use bogus information to refute Rome, shame on them! 

John Chrysostom: "sinners receive pardon by the intercession of Mary alone"

I recently came across the following quote attributed to the early church father,  John Chrysostom: "sinners receive pardon by the intercession of Mary alone."  This Chrysostom snippet was part of a pro-Roman Catholic cumulative case of quotes from church history alleging to prove, "devotion to Mary is necessary for salvation." Without any disposition in looking up any of the quotes, I picked this Chrysostom quote from the list at random and decided to search out the original context. 

I don't claim to have any in-depth knowledge of Chrysostom's Mariology.  However, reading a quote from the actual source it came from as opposed to seeing it isolated surrounded by other out-of-context snippets often determines how much trust a particular web-page should be given.

My expedition to find the primary source determined that the context actually doesn't matter: it strongly appears this Chrysostom quote has a spurious pedigree. If he wrote it, the extant primary sources available today don't verify its authenticity.    

Documentation

This is a popular quote: simply do a basic Google "all" search to see the numerous hits it receives. It's not simply excessively Pro-Marian Roman Catholics utilizing it, a number of Rome's cyber-detractors find it an obvious example of blatant Mariolatry. A Google Books search reveals the obvious source of this quote and how it gained it's notoriety.  The majority of book usages point to one ultimate source,  Alfonso Maria de' Liguori, The Glories of Mary:

On these words St. Bernard encourages sinners, saying, 'Go to this Mother of Mercy, and show her the wounds which thy sins have left on thy soul ; then will she certainly entreat her Son, by the breasts that gave him suck, to pardon thee all. And this Divine Son, who loves her so tenderly, will most certainly grant her petition.'  In this sense it is that the holy Church, in her almost daily prayer calls upon us to beg our Lord to grant us the powerful help of the intercession of Mary to rise from our sins: Grant thy help to our weakness, O most merciful God; and that we, who are mindful of the holy Mother of God, may by the help of her intercession rise from our iniquities. With reason then does St. Lawrence Justinian call her the hope of malefactors;' since she alone is the one who obtains them pardon from God. With reason does St. Bernard call her the sinners' ladder;' since she, the most compassionate Queen, extending her hand to them, draws them from an abyss of sin, and enables them to ascend to God. With reason does an ancient writer call her the only hope of sinners;' for by her help alone can we hope for the remission of our sins. St. John Chrysostom also says 'that sinners receive pardon by the intercession of Mary alone (Per hanc et peccatorum veniam consequimur.---S. Joan. Chrysost. ap. Metaph. Brev. Rom. In Off. Nat. B. M. die 5.).

de' Liguori originally wrote this in Italian:

The Reference given in both the Italian and English share basic similarities, though the English has more information. This is because the English translator tried to check all the quotes and references (and also mentions a number of errors due to "the negligence of printers and editors"). 

What the reference actually shows is that it is not to a primary source from John Chrysostom. Rather, "Metaph" refers to the author Symeon Metaphrastes (tenth century). The old Catholic Encyclopedia refers to him as "The principal compiler of the legends of saints in the Menologia of the Byzantine Church." "Brev." refers to "Breviary" which is a book corresponding to chronological dates and readings, so in this case, it would be a chronological sampling utilizing the material of  Symeon Metaphrastes alleges to have collected of Chrysostom. 

The section from Metaphrastes citing Chrysostom appears in a number of sources. Let's utilize this one here. Basically, three small excerpts from Chrysostom from Symeon Metaphrastes are presented (Lectio IV, V, VI). The quote in question is found in Lectio VI.

  

Context

English Translation:

She is the mother of him, who was begotten of the Father before the beginning of all things; whom Angels and men acknowledge to be the Lord of all things. Would you know how much greater is this Virgin than any of the heavenly powers? They stand in his presence with fear and trembling, and veiled faces; she offers human nature to him whom she brought forth. Through her we obtain the forgiveness of our sins. Hail, then, O mother, heaven, maiden, virgin, throne, ornament, glory and foundation of the Church: pray without ceasing for us to Jesus, your Son and our Lord, that through you we may find mercy in the day of judgment, and may be able to obtain those good things which are prepared for those who love God, through the grace and loving-kindness of Jesus Christ our Lord: to whom, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, and honour, and dominion, now and forever, world without end. Amen.

Conclusion

In fairness to Rome's defenders, the reference found in de' Liguori's The Glories of Mary is indeed found in "ap. Metaph. Brev. Rom. In Off. Nat. B. M. die 5." It is true that Symeon Metaphrastes did present this quote from John Chrysostom "Per hanc et peccatorum veniam consequimur" (through her is the remission of sins) and de' Liguori translated it more forcefully: "che solo per l'intercessione di Maria i peccatori rivcevono il perdono" ("sinners receive forgiveness only through Mary's intercession"). This forcefulness was retained in the English translation.

The major problem with the quote is that it doesn't appear to be found in the extant writings of John Chrysostom. Note the following: 

"In the Roman Breviary, Festa Setembris die xii., there is the following extract from Metaphrastes. Vainly have we endeavored to find it in the Benedictine edition of Chrysostom's works, and there can be little doubt that it was not written by Chrysostom" (source).

"The passage is found in the Breviary, in Off. Nat. B. M. Die. 5, infra Oct. Lect. vi. The heading to Lect. iv. derives that and the two following Lessons from Sermo Sancti Joannis Chrysostomi apud Metaphrasten. It is sufficient to say that they do not occur in any discourse, published as genuine or spurious, in the great editions of S. Chrysostom. The authority of Symeon Metaphrastes is really worth less than nothing in such a case as this; for a genuine work of S. Chrysostom would have had little attraction for a writer who took upon himself to remodel and embellish the unadorned Lives of the Saints, with which the earlier Church had been contented, that they might be more agreeable to the false taste and corrupted religious sentiment of the tenth century" (source). 

I have vainly endeavored to find this extract in the Benedictine edition of Chrysostom; and have little doubt that it is taken from some spurious work (source).

 Theoretically, Symeon Metaphrastes could have had access to a primary source in the tenth century from Chrysostom that is no longer extant today. The Old Catholic Encyclopedia does their best to defend his reputation. They do though point out, "It is certain, that a number of these legends were written by Symeon from such sources as he found (partly oral tradition)." And also:

At one time his name was a byword for absurd fabrications. Ehrhard, Dobschütz and others have now shown him to be a conscientious compiler who made the best use of his material that he could. The often absurd stories in his lives were already contained in the sources from which he wrote them; he is not responsible for these, since his object was simply to collect and arrange the legends of the saints as they existed in his time.

 

Luther: “Men have broad and large chests, and small narrow hips, and more understanding than women..."

On the web page, Twenty Vile Quotes Against Women By Church Leaders from St. Augustine to Pat Robertson, the following Martin Luther quote is mentioned:

Men have broad and large chests, and small narrow hips, and more understanding than women, who have but small and narrow breasts, and broad hips, to the end they should remain at home, sit still, keep house, and bear and bring up children. –Martin Luther, Reformer (1483-1546), Table Talk 

This quote is one of a number proving "Christianity produced a steady diet of misogyny for over 2000 years," put forth by a "former evangelical," now a "psychologist and writer." Her biography can be found here. She appears to still embrace some form of spirituality, but rallies against conservative Christianity. It's interesting that while her entry spans the entirety of church history, she chose a big picture of Martin Luther to head her blog post (pictured here also).

Let's take a closer look at the quote. It's easy to cherry-pick quotes from church history, especially with an agenda and self-imposed blinders. While Luther was not in any sense a modern-day feminist, he was not the simplicity of a few quotes strung together to make him "vile."  

Documentation

The quote has traveled far, found not only in a number of webpages, but published books as well. The webpage simply says, "Table Talk," while correct, isn't a helpful reference. Which Table Talk? There are multiple versions of the Table Talk, both in their original languages and later English translations. 

The bulk of this Table Talk comment was recorded by Luther's associate Veit Dietrich sometime in 1531. LW 54 states Dietrich "had a gift for getting the substance of Luther's remarks on paper" but was not always interested "in reporting the particular situation to which the Reformer was addressing himself" (LW 54:5). Such is the case with this remark. There is no context, at all. 

The comment can be found in WA, TR 1:19,

The original transcription was in a Latin / German mix (with the word "home" being in Greek, oikouros). "Keep house, and bear and bring up children" was not recorded by Dietrich, but appears to be an addition by John Aurifaber. Aurifaber did record some of Luther's comments, but only in the last year of his life, so he did not personally witness this remark. He relied on the notes of others, becoming, in essence, an editor of the primary sources. "Keep house, and bear and bring up children" appears to be an example of Aurifaber smoothing over the original text. In Dietrich's version, Luther is recorded as ending by saying women should stay home because they have big hips and wide buttocks to sit on. What was perhaps Luther making a crude comment in jest was smoothed over with the addition of "being homemakers and raising children." 

Aurifaber's popular German version  was the means by which the comment made it's way into English.  Aurifaber's German text reads,  

This German version was translated into English in the seventeenth-century, but further complicated things by combined two different Table Talk utterances together (80, 81):

Then the English was eventually revised in the eighteenth-century (similarly combining two different Table Talk entries). Eventually, some later English versions of the Table Talk separated the comment back to its isolated form. It appears the version being utilized by the feminist blogger actually wasn't taken from any of these, but rather a secondary source because of the uniqueness of the phrase "more understanding than women," The actual English versions of the Table Talk typically read, "more understanding than the women."

This particular Table Talk statement was included in Luther's Works (LW 54:8), combining Dietrich with Aurifaber's ending denoted by brackets. Notice also LW's smoothing over "latum podicem" with the obscure English rendering, "fundament."

Context

No. 55: The Difference Between Men and Women Summer or Fall, 1531

“Men have broad shoulders and narrow hips, and accordingly they possess intelligence. Women have narrow shoulders and broad hips. Women ought to stay at home; the way they were created indicates this, for they have broad hips and a wide fundament to sit upon [keep house and bear and raise children].”

Conclusion

Luther didn't write the Table Talk. Since the statements contained therein are purported to have been made by Luther, they should serve more as corroborating second-hand testimony to something Luther is certain to have written. The "former evangelical" using the quote would've given herself more credibility had she first documented the quote correctly, then, secondly, not used it at all, but rather utilized a quote with a context and a better pedigree (something actually written by Luther). From our current western pro-feminist zeitgeist, she would've certainly found some actual Luther quotes. 

The basic problem with the feminist using this quote is that it's selective in leaving out all the other positive things Luther said about women that don't fall in the category of "vile." Factor in also the comments Luther made about his wife (which would double the size of this entry). Did the "former evangelical" consider any of this evidence? I have my doubts. It's simply human nature, be it male or female, to vilify that which we're against, to treat people unfairly, especially if they've been dead for many centuries, lived in a different time period and in a different culture... that's the way discrimination works.  

From my contemporary perspective, I suspect the original source reveals Luther was probably making a crude joke. This though is only speculation. Regardless, it's not the sort of comment I approve of, even in jest.  Was it a "vile" quote against women? That depends. If one has a modernist sensitivity to anything that speaks negatively of women, even in jest, then, yes. If Luther was simply making a joke, humorists have made fun of the social and physical differences between men and women for centuries, relying on broad stereotypes.