This is a very general question, so I can only assume you mean the largest 'reform' of our era: the Second Vatican Council which took place from 1962 to 1965. Targeted is probably not the best word, either. The Holy Spirit moved Pope John XXIII and the college of Cardinals to have what is called an Ecumenical Council. It was the 21st Ecunmenical Council in the history of the Church. These such events usually call for reforms in the Chuch. In this particular case, it was no different than any other: The Church felt that it needed to adopt new practices in order to keep up with modern times. For example, prior to this parcitucal council, all Masses were said in Latin everywhere. Afterwards, it was determined that it would make it easier for more people to go to Mass if they were said in the language of the nation the church belonged to.
because church is alwys behind the state
because the church wasnt in good hands!
Martin Luther was a Catholic monk who sought to reform the Catholic Church.
William Tyndale did not reform the Catholic Church, he left it and was excommunicated as a heretic.
It is the protesting to the teaching of the church particularly Catholic.
Martin Luther felt that the Catholic Church needed reform because of the bad behavior of his fellow
anus
The Spanish did not reform the Anglican church. The Anglican church is English and begun by Henry when he threw out the Catholic church in England.
Jan Hus
The Catholic Church is perpetually in a state of reform & renewal. Or, possibly the term: reformed catholic church is an indirect reference to the Protestant Reformation since the term: catholic church is not capitalized?
The Catholic Reform was more than enough in the "Reformation era", it just wasn't "enough" for the protestants, as the Catholic Church is incapable of being anything other than the Catholic Church. As the Catholic Church is the Body of Christ and guaranteed by Him, and guided by the Holy Spirit, it is always enough.
corrupt.
They believed that the church rejected the bible
Lutheranism