On July 6, 1415, as John Hus (whose name means "goose" in his native Czech) made his way to the place of execution, the authorities made him pass by a bonfire where his books were burning. Hus was unafraid and predicted the Protestant Reformation with almost uncanny accuracy. Some of his last words were: You are going to burn a goose but in a century you will have a swan which you can neither roast nor boil. [source]
This "Swan" of this statement has popularly been interpreted to be Martin Luther, not to mention, even by Luther himself:
However, I, Dr. Martinus, have been called to this work and was compelled to become a doctor, without any initiative of my own, but out of pure obedience. Then I had to accept the office of doctor and swear a vow to my most beloved Holy Scriptures that I would preach and teach them faithfully and purely. While engaged in this kind of teaching, the papacy crossed my path and wanted to hinder me in it. How it has fared is obvious to all, and it will fare still worse. It shall not hinder me. In God’s name and call I shall walk on the lion and the adder, and tread on the young lion and dragon with my feet. And this which has been begun during my lifetime will be completed after my death. St. John Huss prophesied of me when he wrote from his prison in Bohemia, “They will roast a goose now (for ‘Huss’ means ‘a goose’), but after a hundred years they will hear a swan sing, and him they will endure.” And that is the way it will be, if God wills. [LW 34:103]I hadn't really thought much of the statement from Hus, other than the irony that indeed, a century later a lone monk began the Protestant Reformation. It's a popular quote. In my mind coincidence, nothing more. While reading in another area, I came across an article by Robert Scribner, Incombustible Luther: The Image of the Reformer in Early Modern Germany. Google Books offers a limited preview of this article with some missing pages, so I went ahead and ordered the book.
This is an incredibly interesting article. It documents the way that many turned Luther into a saint after his death. Stories circulated that paintings of him refused to burn. Luther's special saint miracle was his incombustibility. The picture above in this entry is said to be a painting from 1689 that refused to burn, though it isn't certain. It's indeed the stuff of legends and fantasy. If you get a chance, read through Scribner's article, or at least what Google Books makes available. Note the similarities between the Luther myth and the typical Romanist saint myths.
Scribner's article takes an interesting look at a variety of the Luther legends, even those attributed to him while still living. Among those he covers is the quote from Hus:
A truly interesting find. Even Luther produced a botched quote, and did so to promote himself.
Posts
14 comments:
Well, that proves that Luther was a lying drunkard then doesn't it. Which in turn proves that the entire Protestant reformation was a sham. Why can't you see that imperfections in Luther's character are great arguments against the reformation? Furthermore, why can't you see that when a pope does something awful it's completely irrelevant to the argument? Jeez. You Prostestants and your 48,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 denominations!
Yes well, I was thinking perhaps I was going to be the one Hus meant, but since Luther botched it, I'm just going have to continue the cover up.
I knew it. You're only interested in exhonerating history's greatest criminal.
Andrew, I think I have the answer to your question here:
"Why can't you see that imperfections in Luther's character are great arguments against the reformation?"
Just because someone has problems with their character doesn't really effect the message that someone gives. I'm not trying to be disrespectful when I say this Andrew, but I'm sure that there are things about your character that are flawed but you would still like us to accept your message right? In fact, if you looked at everyone you would find flaws, it's called being human. We are flawed in every part of our life. Yet we still can give good messages.
Your next question:
"Furthermore, why can't you see that when a pope does something awful it's completely irrelevant to the argument?"
I think you need to realize that the claims made by Luther are taken in by people and are to be judged according to what the Bible says. If Luther wants to state that Mary was immaculately conceived, then we have the right to disagree based on a Biblical standpoint. Yet the pope is different. He demands an unquestionable loyalty and is representing the entire Roman Catholic Church. He is the infallible ruler in cases of faith and morals, and when he declares something (even if it's completely wrong) you can't question him.
So in review, Luther is a man that can be wrong and nobody denies that.
The pope on the other hand cannot be wrong because if he is, he takes away the credibility of his church, the Roman Catholic Church. The pope's character is his message, and when the message is wrong it is shown through his character.
If you want to follow a man that claims to be infallible, you better hope he's right. Because if he isn't, then maybe all of those other denominations are onto something.
Zipper, I was being sarcastic. I have a habit of making these kinds of tongue-in-cheek remarks on Mr. Swan's Luther posts. This is in order to mock some of the more ridiculous things said about Luther, and about the Reformation in general because of Luther, by Roman Catholic apologists.
Yes Zipper,Andrew helps out the RC's by posting exactly what most of them think.
But on the other hand, your points are right on. If you stick around, you'll probably get a chance to use them for real.
Did I mention that Luther liked to eat little girl's kittens while they wept and begged him to stop? He would usually reply "I am much too drunk and belligerent to stop eating your ugly kitten." He was a terrible man.
Andrew, LOL.
Poggius Florentini was a Roman Catholic priest and an observer at Huss’ martyrdom. As an eyewitness he wrote about all that happened. Here are his words:
“In thee, O Lord, I put my trust, bow down thine ear to me.”
With such Christian prayers, Hus arrived at the stake, looking at it
without fear. He climbed upon it, after two assistants of the hangman had torn his clothes from him and had clad him into a shirt drenched with
pitch. At that moment, one of the electors, Prince Ludwig of the
Palatinate, rode up and pleaded with Hus to recant, so that he might be
spared a death in the flames. But Hus replied: “Today you will roast a
lean goose, but hundred years from now you will hear a swan sing,
whom you will leave unroasted and no trap or net will catch him for
you.” Full of pity and filled with much admiration, the Prince turned
away.
Luther or Reformers didn't make this up. It was recorded by a Roman Catholic eyewithness long before. The book with his writing, including this quote, can be bought here:
http://www.amazon.com/Hus-Heretic-Papist-Poggius/dp/0766142183
Hmm I could've sworn Pope John XXIII (condemned by the Council of Constance and deposed as Pope in the 15th century) was worse. Ah well!
Flaws in a person does not lessen the truth of their message. Systemic inconsistencies between the source of one's teachings and the teachings themselves is not only sin but a tradgic crime.
The book supposedly written by Poggio Bracciolini Florentini, or Poggius the Papist, is not a reliable source to substantiate the story of Hus predicting Luther. As one researcher put it:
Under the title, The Infallibility of the Pope at the Council of Constance and Huss's Trial, Sentence, and Death at the Stake, written by a member of the council, Pogius, Prior of St. Niklasen, an interesting but spurious description is given of incidents in Huss's journey and his trial on July 6 in the cathedral of Constance, which differs materially from the accredited authorities. So far as it can be traced, the booklet appeared first at Reutlingen, Wiirtemberg, 1846. A reprint was issued in St. Louis, Mo., 1875, five years after the proclamation of the dogma of papal infallibility. The Reutlingen edition purported to be a reprint of an original edition said to have appeared at Constance, and contains on its title-page the statement, erstmals gedruckt 1523 zu Costnitz — originally printed at Constance, 1523. The volume contains two letters written in a most graphic style by Pogius, who represents himself as having accompanied Huss from Prague to Constance and as having undergone a change from an enemy of the heretic to a warm partisan. The route he represents Huss as having taken differs from the route as laid down in Huss's letters and by Mladenowicz.
The description Pogius gives of the sitting of the council in the cathedral of Constance, July 6, when Huss was condemned, contains the startling statement that the verdict of heresy was not unanimous. On the contrary, according to Pogius, it was resisted by a number of bishops, whose addresses of dissent he professes to give. The most of these dissenting prelates were Germans, but Vincent Ferrer, the Spaniard, also voted with the minority.
The volume is evidently a forgery, and contradicts Huss's letters, Mladenowicz's account, the documents in Van der Hardt, and the statements of Gerson, d'Ailly, and other accredited sources. There is no evidence of the booklet's having been in existence before the ReutHngen edition appeared [1846]. The term Costnitz, which is Slavic, was not used for Constance by the Germans. The name Pogius, the author, was evidently meant to conceal the forgery by its resemblance to "Poggius," the Italian humanist, who wrote the brilliant account of Jerome's trial and death at the stake. Poggius's public career and personal habits are out of accord with what Pogius tells about himself.
The motive of the forgery is a matter of conjecture, whether it was by a Catholic to remove the odium from the church arising from the unanimous verdict against Huss, or by a Protestant to serve as a burlesque on the alleged sacredness of the council which voted down teachings of Scripture in condemning Huss and, at the same time, liberty of thought in religious matters.
The difficulty of burying a book after it has once been put into print is afforded by this booklet, which has recently been reprinted in Berlin to further the interest in the Huss anniversary of 1915, even as the story of Luther's violent death is every now and then republished, lie though it is.
https://archive.org/stream/johnhusshislife00scha/johnhusshislife00scha_djvu.txt
Jeez Andrew, you and your blind faith in heresy. How far down the hole to hell dug by the non Biblical office of the papacy are you willing to go? If you had any interest in heaven you would value Scripture over all nonsense and find yourself thinking very much like Luther who re formed a broken church. Others just thought it cool to defy authority and make good examples of bad churches just different than the dead so called ortodox (failed) that were in the start. Luther is not responsible for the cheap imitators, even the ones who insist on keeping his name after abandoning his teaching. So, examine the book of Concord and be the first to find Biblical fault before claiming to be an expert.
I feel very lucky because of the reformation in 1517, otherwise i would be in the catholic church with their ridiculous and unbiblical teaching.
Post a Comment