"Let God damn your rest, let God damn your work!"

  • Thread starter Thread starter raumzeitmc2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

raumzeitmc2

Guest
You are concerned about your rest and your personal interests…Therefore I proclaim to you in the name of Almighty God whose command you defy: Upon your work there shall rest no blessing … Therefore, let God damn your rest, let God damn your work!
Those are allegedly the words of William Farel rebuking John Calvin for his reluctance in taking up his position as a reformer.

Calvin: a life, 1954, Emanuel Stickelberger, p. 48.

Church history 101: an introduction for Presbyterians, 2006, William M. Ramsay, p. 57.

Just curious: Assuming the above statement is true, does anyone think it at all odd?

Or does anyone think it a curious way for God to inaugurate a “reform” of his Church?
 
Genesis 3:17
To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it,’ "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.
 
No more than a comatose drunk who’d accidentally exposed himself, and then suffering from a hangover cursing his grandson, because the grandson’s father had seen him naked, and told his brothers. That happened in the case of Noah, his son Ham, and grandson Canaan (Genesis 9:20-27).

Or as my old pastor put it, “How much notice would you take of a drunk’s curse?”

But it’s in the Bible, ostensibly because the Jews later wiped out the Canaanites. They had to have some theological reason to think the Canaanites were cursed. Centuries later, it was also one of the verses used to justify Aparthied in South Africa, since the black people of Africa were supposed to be descendants of Ham, and could therefore be treated as sub-human and cheap labour.

Farel was a hot-head, and Calvin was a martinet. But both of them lived at a time when they took their faith seriously, and thought it really mattered.

There were some fiery things being said on the Catholic side as well.

One of the short term effects of the Catholic Counter Reformation for example was the outlawing of polyphonic music by the Council of Trent since Lutheranism allowed it. That was just plain stupid, but it was a reactionary response.

If we went through Church history, Catholic or Protestant, we’d find a fair amount of nonsense as well as wisdom. It’s one of the reasons, as a former Protestant, I’m not much of a fan of the dogma of “Papal Infallibility”.
 
When I first saw this thread I thought perhaps it was a quote from Jeremiah Wright, at it again…remember, the Obama preacher? LOL :eek:
 
Just curious: Assuming the above statement is true, does anyone think it at all odd?

Or does anyone think it a curious way for God to inaugurate a “reform” of his Church?
If that statement is indeed true, it is merely another monument to the stupidity of man.
 
I’m picturing Charleton Heston looking up at the Statue of Liberty…“You b…” LOL “You really did it!!”
If that statement is indeed true, it is merely another monument to the stupidity of man.
 
The quote is in perfect alignment with 16th century Reformed thinking. The Reformers such as Farel believed God had ordain Calvin for Geneva. Calvin himself thought otherwise. He arrived in Geneva in 1536 only due to trying to bypass a war in Eastern France between the Holy Roman Empire and France. He only agreed to stay for a short time, his objective was Strasbourg. He was only too happy to reach Strasbourg in 1538, after leaving/being kicked out of Geneva.

This quote is from 1541. Calvin is in Strasbourg. The reform has lost steam in Geneva. Catholicism is making inroads and there is not a reformed authority to oppose it. Farel and the city government appeal to Calvin. He refuses stating “Rather would I submit to death a hundred times than to that cross on which I had to perish daily a thousand times over.” T.H.L. Parker, Biography of Calvin, 2006 (?). Calvin did not want to return. An agreement was reached upon which Strasbourg “loaned” him to Geneva for six months. Calvin did not return.

Farel’s statement is consistent with Reformed thought. The reformed church in Geneva though it was God’s will for Calvin to return. Calvin was in disobedience to the will of God. God would not bless his life if he was disobedient. Rather he would damn him for it. For a reformer, to be outside the will of God was to face the wrath of God.

“Or does anyone think it a curious way for God to inaugurate a “reform” of his Church?”

For a Catholic or Orthodox, very curious. How you look at this comment of Farel’s and the reformation is very much how the Jews looked at Christianity. Could not one of the Jewish leaders or laity think it “curious” for God to inaugurate a reform of the convenant by a required human sacrifice? We Christians view it differently obviously, just as Reformed minded Protestant Christians view many things differently.

By the way, the Reformation started well before 1541 (1517), so this quote was not how God inaugrated the reform of the church. Reformers would say it was the by the sounds of a hammer nailing a parchment on the door of a Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top