Reformation Sunday

[gurneyhalleck1]

Huh?

The people of truth celebrate everyday alike. The earth isn’t flat and we love the creator of the non flat earth. Take christmas, easter, sunday, saturday… all the same.

The people of truth hold the divine liturgy daily. Without end. This is the continual sacrifice. And as perfect as it is it is no sacrifice at all.

 

[jeanannemarie]

Is it true that the hymn “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” (by M. Luther) was written for the Reformation ?

 

[JonNC]

Is it true that the hymn “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” (by M. Luther) was written for the Reformation ?

There are different theories as to why Luther wrote it. Whatever the reason, it did become known as “the battle hymn of the Reformation”.

Jon

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Great hymn, too!

There are different theories as to why Luther wrote it. Whatever the reason, it did become known as “the battle hymn of the Reformation”.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Great hymn, too!

It is, indeed, nad it has been adopted by other Protestants and Catholics alike. It seems it has outgrown the narrow moniker “battle hymn of the Reformation” that it once had.

It is not my favorite Luther hymn, however. I absolutely love the Trinitarian Hymn, Lord, Keep Us Steadfast in Your Word

Lord, keep us steadfast in your Word;
Curb those who by deceit or sword
Would wrest the kingdom from your Son
And bring to nought all he has done.

Lord Jesus Christ, your power make known,
For you are Lord of lords alone;
Defend your holy Church that we
May sing your praise triumphantly.

O Comforter of priceless worth,
Send peace and unity on earth;
Support us in our final strife
And lead us out of death of life.

Jon

PS: The Giants, WOW!!

Jon

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Sounds like a great tune! Some of the Reformation era music is outstanding. I’ve always been fascinated by Luther, as you know.

Yes, the Giants have destiny, FOR ONCE, behind them I think. Huff and Burrell and Posey carried us this year. Then when Huff and Barrell quieted down and Torres went quiet, enter Cody and Uribe. When Cody quieted down, Renteria, Uribe, and Rowand came to life. It’s the mark of a championship team when someone always fills those gaps and no one guy carries the team. It’s just a different feel from 2002 when Bonds, Kent, and Snow were the heroes. It is rag-tag, fun, blue collar feel, and magic. The pitching isn’t ALL that we have as some have liked to point out. And those nay-sayers (namely espn!) who think we’re not winning but rather “Texas is beating themselves,” hogwash! It’s a Texas BBQ!

If Texas does win a game, and I think this likely, they’ll win today possibly. I think Colby Lewis can outpitch Sanchez and the Rangers are heapin’ mad! But the series is ours. I can feel it in my bones.

Finally after all the waiting, I can die in peace!

Did you see the Yahoo story about the “Journey” songs at AT&T Park!? You know, Steve Perry from Journey grew up in my area, about 10 miles from here, and he grew up a HUGE Giants fan. They were singing “Lights” and “Don’t Stop Believin’” at the game and then guess who happened to start leading the tune? Steve was there!
huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/29/giants-fans-sing-along-to_n_775893.html

It is, indeed, nad it has been adopted by other Protestants and Catholics alike. It seems it has outgrown the narrow moniker “battle hymn of the Reformation” that it once had.

It is not my favorite Luther hymn, however. I absolutely love the Trinitarian Hymn, Lord, Keep Us Steadfast in Your Word

Lord, keep us steadfast in your Word;
Curb those who by deceit or sword
Would wrest the kingdom from your Son
And bring to nought all he has done.

Lord Jesus Christ, your power make known,
For you are Lord of lords alone;
Defend your holy Church that we
May sing your praise triumphantly.

O Comforter of priceless worth,
Send peace and unity on earth;
Support us in our final strife
And lead us out of death of life.

Jon

PS: The Giants, WOW!!

Jon

 

[JustaServant]

Just a thought I’d like to add: There are some Protestants out there who don’t know the first thing about Catholicism. For them, celebrating Reformation Day may be little more than celebrating where their beloved denominations came from. Not all of them are trying to stick it to you by observing it.

I won’t celebrate it. It’s time for All Saints, and I don’t think the date of the Wittenberg Door event deserves to dominate the worship service! It was what it was. None of us can change that. But some Christians out there are observing it out of either ignorance or simply historical interest. Should they? Maybe not; I’ll leave that for the Spirit to decide as He molds minds and consciences.

Ahh, what a confusing mess Christianity has become. Lord have mercy.

Across the Tiber I found most people were not all that interested in any kind of Church history, let alone Reformation history. The only people who seemed to be interested, were the pastors.
It is curious that Luther chose the eve of the feast of All Saints, to nail his conplaint to the Wittenburg church door.
IMO, if we are interested in real unity, this ‘celebration’ needs to go by the wayside.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Protestants view the Reformation as a correction of the abuses of the Romish church. October 31 is celebrated as a throwing off of the onerous yoke of Rome and embracing of true Christian freedom.

What abuses?

 

[Janet1983]

Many Protestant churches celebrate this day on October 31st.
I would like non-Catholics to explain why it is necessary to celebrate such a negative event. It’s like a person celebrating thier divorce every year.

The beginning of the Reformation is a historical event that did lead to what we now know as the Lutheran Church. Despite all the chaos that ensued in its wake this day is still a public holiday in all the German states that are predominantly Protestant.
I was raised in a predominantly Catholic state so I didn’t get the 31st of October off, but I got All Saints Day off every year.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

And at my Catholic parish here in town if you surveyed 100 people on who Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Augustine of Hippo, Aquinas, and St. Dominic were, they wouldn’t have a clue. They couldn’t tell you much of anything about history. Most Catholics around here just went to CCD, memorized the prayers, and go through the motions. And yet there are some very learned Catholics who are highly adept in their faith who know A LOT.

Same with any church. There are well-read Anglicans, and drones. There are well-read historically-savvy Lutherans, and typical parishoners.

Things are not just historically-literate, lucid, and wise on the Catholic side of the Tiber. That’s a pretty broad brush there…

Go around and look at how many Catholics you think have read the Summa or City of God!

Across the Tiber I found most people were not all that interested in any kind of Church history, let alone Reformation history. The only people who seemed to be interested, were the pastors.
It is curious that Luther chose the eve of the feast of All Saints, to nail his conplaint to the Wittenburg church door.
IMO, if we are interested in real unity, this ‘celebration’ needs to go by the wayside.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Primarily indulgences. They disgusted Luther to no end, understandably!

What abuses?

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Primarily indulgences. They disgusted Luther to no end, understandably!

Luther certainly had a good point about them. Would like to know what other abuses JerryS refers to.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

LOL…must be L.A. water

 

[raumzeitmc2]

Primarily indulgences. They disgusted Luther to no end, understandably!

WRONG!

If Luther was “disgusted” by indulgences, it was undoubtedly the same kind of ‘disgust’ he felt for the holy apostle! This is from his “Tischreden” or “Table Talk”:

Luther Has Low Opinion of Epistle of James: Summer or Fall, 1542 No. 5443 Recorded by Caspar Heydenreich (Kaspar Heidenreich (1510-1586)).

We should throw the Epistle of James out of this school, 27 for it doesn’t amount to much. It contains not a syllable about Christ. Not once does it mention Christ, except at the beginning [Jas. 1:1, 2:1]. I maintain that some Jew wrote it who probably heard about Christian people but never encountered any. Sine he heard that Christians place great weight on faith in Christ, he though, ‘Wait a moment! I’ll oppose them and urge works alone.’ This he did. He wrote not a word about the suffering and resurrection of Christ, although this is what all the apostles preached about.

Besides, there’s no order or method in the epistle. Now he discusses clothing and the he writes about wrath and is constantly shifting from one to the other. He presents a comparison: ‘As the body apart form the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead’ [Jas. 2:26]. O Mary, mother of God! What a terrible comparison that is! James compared faith with the soul! The ancients recognized this, too, and therefore, they didn’t acknowledge this letter as one of the Catholic Epistles. 28

Luther’s Works, American Ed., 1967, Theodore G. Tappert, Helmut T. Lehmann, eds., Fortress Press, Philadelphia, ISBN 0800603540 ISBN 9780800603540, vol. 55, pp. 424-425.

The truth is that Luther and his followers never tired of greatly misrepresented the whole Indulgence business. As for disgusting, what would you call this?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Your post makes several missteps, raum. First of all, you act as if I have not read hundreds of hours on Luther and you assume I don’t know his views, his propoganda, his opinions on Jews, and all his warts and pimples. I know them all too well.

So what’s your point? You’re trying to cover up bad behavior by the Church on indulgences with bad behavior on Luther? I see this strategy on our school’s playground daily. Divert, “yeah, well he did it more than me!” from your own guilt is the kids’ strategy. Doesn’t work with me there or here.

I merely answered a poster’s question. Go back and read it and cool off ok? He asked about what abuses the poster was probably referring to regarding the Reformation and Luther. It is a well-known piece of history that Luther’s rebellion started around indulgences. Am I wrong? No. So cool off the polemics and heated rancor there. I’m not out to argue this; I’m merely answering a question…sheeshh

WRONG!

If Luther was “disgusted” by indulgences, it was undoubtedly the same kind of ‘disgust’ he felt for the holy apostle! This is from his “Tischreden” or “Table Talk”:

Luther Has Low Opinion of Epistle of James: Summer or Fall, 1542 No. 5443 Recorded by Caspar Heydenreich (Kaspar Heidenreich (1510-1586)).

The truth is that Luther and his followers never tired of greatly misrepresented the whole Indulgence business. As for disgusting, what would you call this?

 

[Bluegoat]

Luther certainly had a good point about them. Would like to know what other abuses JerryS refers to.

Simony

 

[JonNC]

Luther certainly had a good point about them. Would like to know what other abuses JerryS refers to.

Private masses for another.

Regarding another post (not by you, Matthew), we can certainly point fingers at each other Luther on the Jews, Eck on the Jews, etc) and get nowhere but continuity of division.
Polemics, regardless of the source, sin, regardless of the origin, do not move us toward reconciliation.

Jon

 

[Bluegoat]

More generally, the excesses of the popes and clergy were scandalous. If we had popes who behaved like that, and local clergy who did as well, I think anyone would think it was natural to question the integrity of the institution.

 

[jrose90]

I’ve personally never heard of it being celebrated, but I guess it would be like Americans celebrating the Fourth of July. Many Protestants believe that removing themselves from the Catholic Church was a kind of religious liberation (from a corrupt clergy, from superstition, etc.), so I guess that’s why they would celebrate it.

 

[raumzeitmc2]

So what’s your point? You’re trying to cover up bad behavior by the Church on indulgences with bad behavior on Luther?

Not to worry … I *never *try to cover bad behavior by churchmen - whether Protestant or Catholic, as is evidenced by this.

I merely answered a poster’s question. Go back and read it and cool off ok?

I’m always cool - very cool!

It is a well-known piece of history that Luther’s rebellion started around indulgences. Am I wrong? No.

Well, I have to correct you my friend, because you are wrong. Very wrong! *Indulgences *were just a pretext for Luther’s apostasy.

I quote Fr. Denifle’s work on Luther (pp. xxxiii-xxxiv):

And again, if these same theologians make the excuse that they regard Luther as the founder of a religion only in so far as he eliminated from the Church the scandals and abuses, I will answer: Utinam. But unfortunately the only thing he accomplished — as I shall show exhaustively in the second volume — was to fill the measure of degeneracy, and to complete the infamy of moral degeneracy and decay.

Moreover, even though the motive of Luther had been purely to eliminate from the Church her scandals and abuses, it would have been unwarranted in him to pour out the child along with the bath; for even Gerson, writing one hundred years before Luther to the heretics of his time, says: “They remind me of a foolish physician, who in his efforts to cure his patient of disease, robs him of life.” This same Gerson was in 1521 declared by Melanchthon to be “a great man in all things.”

And so it happened that in these efforts to exterminate existing evils other errors sprang into being. We shall hear Luther repeatedly deliver himself of this opinion, that a thing should not be destroyed because it is not free from abuses. Otherwise it would become necessary to kill all the women and throw out all the wine.

Therefore Werstemius, a contemporary of Luther, wrote in 1528: “The unfortunate ones fail to see that if the Pope should commit an act that is wrong, this does not impugn the sacraments, the faith or established usage.” He also says: “The same holds of the unworthy lives of certain cardinals, bishops, canonists, vicars and monks. If these be guilty of irregularities, it does not justify any Protestant, nor even Luther himself, to utter a syllable of protest. Much less to abuse, therefore, the whole Church."

By destroying the unity of the Church, they give the lie in the throat to Christ, as well as to St. Paul, and become themselves the originators of confusion, error, tumult and the desecration of the saints. “Error and suspicion are rampant everywhere.”

Luther himself was at one time of this opinion, for as far as we can trace him back, as I have repeatedly shown in the course of this work, he manifests a spirit of hostility to the abuses in the Church, and to the self-righteousness, singularity and superstition in religious Orders, and as well to the despicable rivalry existing between some of these Orders.

But until 1519 it did not occur to him that he should destroy the unity of the Church, as I shall show in the second volume of this work. If Luther had set his face only against the abuses which were prevalent in the Church, the result would not have been an open rupture, any more than his attack on the real or imaginary abuses of indulgences caused him to separate himself from communion with the Church; for in this encounter his opponents were the same as in subsequent ones.

But that which caused his separation was his antiscriptural doctrine of justification, and his stubborn insistence that it was altogether impossible for any one to resist the lusts of the flesh. This unresistance runs all through his doctrine, and is practically the fundamental principle of it all. To a man of Luther’s character and temperament his apostasy from the one true Church was inevitable; it came, and Luther separated from the one true Church — the Christian Church. He cast aside all authority, and as a logical consequence there came about that state of affairs which in 1519 he deplored as a necessary result, “as many churches as there were heads.” Source.

Fr. Grisar on Luther’s overall dishonesty about Indulgences:

[Luther’s] falsehoods about Tetzel are scarcely believable. The latter was, so he says, such a criminal that he had even been condemned to death. 3 The Indulgence-preachers had declared (what they never thought of doing) “that it was not necessary to have remorse and sorrow in order to obtain the indulgence." 4

In his old age Luther stated that Tetzel had even given Indulgences for future sins. …

It is the same with the statement that Tetzel had sold Indulgences for sins not yet committed. … In Luther s charges against Tetzel in the controversy on the Theses we hear nothing of this; only in the work *Wider Hans Worst *(1541), written in his old age, does he make such an assertion." 5 In this tract Luther does indeed make Tetzel teach that “there was no need of remorse, sorrow or repentance for sin, provided one bought an indulgence, or an indulgence-letter.” He adds: “And he [Tetzel] also sold for future sins.”

This untruth, clearly confuted as it was by facts, passed from Luther s lips to those of his disciples. … In this way Luther’s misrepresentations infected his whole circle, nor can we be surprised if in this, as in so many similar instances, the falsehood has held the field even to our own day. 9

Luther, volume 4, p. 84.