All Saints Day
- Thread starter Romans922
- Start date
- Status
Kevin
Puritan Board Doctor
Mr. Barnes,
Consider the definition of this "holy-day" from the "New Advent Encyclopedia" which is an online Romanist encyclopedia.
Solemnity celebrated on the first of November. It is instituted to honour all the saints, known and unknown, and, according to Urban IV, to supply any deficiencies in the faithful's celebration of saints' feasts during the year.
In the early days the Christians were accustomed to solemnize the anniversary of a martyr's death for Christ at the place of martyrdom. In the fourth century, neighbouring dioceses began to interchange feasts, to transfer relics, to divide them, and to join in a common feast; as is shown by the invitation of St. Basil of Caesarea (397) to the bishops of the province of Pontus. Frequently groups of martyrs suffered on the same day, which naturally led to a joint commemoration. In the persecution of Diocletian the number of martyrs became so great that a separate day could not be assigned to each. But the Church, feeling that every martyr should be venerated, appointed a common day for all. The first trace of this we find in Antioch on the Sunday after Pentecost. We also find mention of a common day in a sermon of St. Ephrem the Syrian (373), and in the 74th homily of St. John Chrysostom (407). At first only martyrs and St. John the Baptist were honoured by a special day. Other saints were added gradually, and increased in number when a regular process of canonization was established; still, as early as 411 there is in the Chaldean Calendar a "Commemoratio Confessorum" for the Friday after Easter. In the West Boniface IV, 13 May, 609, or 610, consecrated the Pantheon in Rome to the Blessed Virgin and all the martyrs, ordering an anniversary. Gregory III (731-741) consecrated a chapel in the Basilica of St. Peter to all the saints and fixed the anniversary for 1 November. A basilica of the Apostles already existed in Rome, and its dedication was annually remembered on 1 May. Gregory IV (827-844) extended the celebration on 1 November to the entire Church. The vigil seems to have been held as early as the feast itself. The octave was added by Sixtus IV (1471-84).
As you can see, there are a number of good reasons for Protestants not to celebrate this day.
1. The regulative principle of worship: God has instituted the Sabbath alone for commemoration by the church.
2. The origin of All Saints' Day is affliated with the idolatrous veneration and invocation of saints of the Roman church. As Protestants we should not give any appearance of countenancing praying to the dead or worshipping them.
Consider the definition of this "holy-day" from the "New Advent Encyclopedia" which is an online Romanist encyclopedia.
Solemnity celebrated on the first of November. It is instituted to honour all the saints, known and unknown, and, according to Urban IV, to supply any deficiencies in the faithful's celebration of saints' feasts during the year.
In the early days the Christians were accustomed to solemnize the anniversary of a martyr's death for Christ at the place of martyrdom. In the fourth century, neighbouring dioceses began to interchange feasts, to transfer relics, to divide them, and to join in a common feast; as is shown by the invitation of St. Basil of Caesarea (397) to the bishops of the province of Pontus. Frequently groups of martyrs suffered on the same day, which naturally led to a joint commemoration. In the persecution of Diocletian the number of martyrs became so great that a separate day could not be assigned to each. But the Church, feeling that every martyr should be venerated, appointed a common day for all. The first trace of this we find in Antioch on the Sunday after Pentecost. We also find mention of a common day in a sermon of St. Ephrem the Syrian (373), and in the 74th homily of St. John Chrysostom (407). At first only martyrs and St. John the Baptist were honoured by a special day. Other saints were added gradually, and increased in number when a regular process of canonization was established; still, as early as 411 there is in the Chaldean Calendar a "Commemoratio Confessorum" for the Friday after Easter. In the West Boniface IV, 13 May, 609, or 610, consecrated the Pantheon in Rome to the Blessed Virgin and all the martyrs, ordering an anniversary. Gregory III (731-741) consecrated a chapel in the Basilica of St. Peter to all the saints and fixed the anniversary for 1 November. A basilica of the Apostles already existed in Rome, and its dedication was annually remembered on 1 May. Gregory IV (827-844) extended the celebration on 1 November to the entire Church. The vigil seems to have been held as early as the feast itself. The octave was added by Sixtus IV (1471-84).
As you can see, there are a number of good reasons for Protestants not to celebrate this day.
1. The regulative principle of worship: God has instituted the Sabbath alone for commemoration by the church.
2. The origin of All Saints' Day is affliated with the idolatrous veneration and invocation of saints of the Roman church. As Protestants we should not give any appearance of countenancing praying to the dead or worshipping them.
VirginiaHuguenot
Puritanboard Librarian
Also consider the teaching of the Westminster Assembly and Fisher's Catechism:Westminster Directory of Public Worship:
WCF, Chap. 20:
WCF, Chap. 21:
Fisher's Catechism:
Kevin
Puritan Board Doctor
None of us "celebrate" All Saints or any of the holy days.
That is to say we don't go to church for a special mass, we light no (liturgical) candles, we say no prayers to or for the dead. In short we don't celebrate it.
I don't believe that that means we should not "observe" or "remember" them. I often use them as a 'talking point' in family worship to teach some lesson to the children. I admit that I focus more on the days related to our family heritage i.e. St. Patrick, St. Andrew, etc but they can be a very useful resource.
Tonight after scripture & catachism I will be talking about the church triumphant and all those who have gone before us yet are part of the same church. To my way of thinking this is a great way t use the Saints Days.
That is to say we don't go to church for a special mass, we light no (liturgical) candles, we say no prayers to or for the dead. In short we don't celebrate it.
I don't believe that that means we should not "observe" or "remember" them. I often use them as a 'talking point' in family worship to teach some lesson to the children. I admit that I focus more on the days related to our family heritage i.e. St. Patrick, St. Andrew, etc but they can be a very useful resource.
Tonight after scripture & catachism I will be talking about the church triumphant and all those who have gone before us yet are part of the same church. To my way of thinking this is a great way t use the Saints Days.
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
However, it does gives us an excuse to turn Novermber 1 into Reformation Day part 2. In all reality, though Luther nailed the Theses the night before, the impact of it did nto reach the people until they went to the chapel and saw it hanging there.
Maybe we could make November 1st an add-on holiday!!??
(I wonder if I'd get that off from work for two days in a row!)
Maybe we could make November 1st an add-on holiday!!??
(I wonder if I'd get that off from work for two days in a row!)
Something I find very ironic is the modern observation of "reformation day" almost as if some Protestants are attempting to create their own Protesatant "holy-days". Although Luther's nailing of the theses was a tremendous act and a blessing to the church and subsequent reformation, it represents only the beginning point of it. As the reformation progressed and doctrine and worship were further refined, we have those marvelous insights and statements Mr. Myers posted above against holy days. This is ironic to me because modern "reformation day" celebrations certainly would not have been approved by many of the reformers themselves (espceially of the reformed branch) nor the later Puritans.
Let us also not forget that the early church did not start out by worshipping the martyrs. This corruption developed over a period of time. They probably used arguments very similar to modern proponents of holy-days for the benefit of remembering history etc.
Let us also not forget that the early church did not start out by worshipping the martyrs. This corruption developed over a period of time. They probably used arguments very similar to modern proponents of holy-days for the benefit of remembering history etc.
BobVigneault
Bawberator
Pastor King,
no one is trying to make Reformation Day a holy-day. The church has never tried to make it a holy-day and it never should be a holy-day. But that should not inhibit anyone, any family or any congregation from expressing joy for the significance of Oct 31st. It is a wonderful time to assess whether or not the church is still reforming and the gospel is being protected. A time to appreciate courage and bravery for defending the gospel. I have never heard anyone suggest elevating the day to sacred status. My 'Irony-Detector' is set on high and I am not picking up even a trace amount sir.
no one is trying to make Reformation Day a holy-day. The church has never tried to make it a holy-day and it never should be a holy-day. But that should not inhibit anyone, any family or any congregation from expressing joy for the significance of Oct 31st. It is a wonderful time to assess whether or not the church is still reforming and the gospel is being protected. A time to appreciate courage and bravery for defending the gospel. I have never heard anyone suggest elevating the day to sacred status. My 'Irony-Detector' is set on high and I am not picking up even a trace amount sir.
My 'Irony-Detector' is set on high and I am not picking up even a trace amount sir.
Perhaps mine is over-sensitive
I didn't mean to imply that it was the same thing as a Romanist holy-day. Nevertheless, I have noticed that some treat this day like a Reformed version of Halloween or something--dressing up as their favorite reformers etc. which I guess is somewhat like the broadly evangelical "harvest parties". (Perhaps this is neither here nor there).
As I read the Puritans, they seem to be set against an annual rembrance of things such as this. They do endorse times of thanksgiving for providential blessings etc. To soften my rhetoric just a bit...I wonder how faithful some of us are being to our Puritan heritage by our introduction of reformation day? OK enough of my musings and ramblings.
- Status
