Posted on 06/19/2009 3:54:08 PM PDT by alpha-8-25-02
He also had a contingent of Dutch Catholic troops too. The other side apparently didn’t have the favor of the Pope at the moment
And Palatine Germans who settled in Ireland...
Many came here and Canada from Ireland
Irish ancestors could have German ancestors...
Or Spanise ancestors from the survivers of the Spanish Armada whho were shipwrecked on the Irish coast and not clobbered as intruders...
James Michener’s novel “ The Covenant” dealing with the settlement of So. Africa refers at length to the immigration of the Huguenots to that part of the world in the aftermath of the revocation of ‘The Edict of Nance” in 1685. From my reading of US history if you are of some French extraction with ancestors who settled in the mid-south you are probably of Protestant heritage. If your ancestors settled in New England, then your heritage is probably Catholic.
DeMolay was a Knight Templar and a forerunner of modern Masonry. That's why the Masons name their youth order the Order of DeMolay. I have pinged Mean West Texan who is probably better informed on this than am I and who is a Mason as I am not.
From France's point of view, bringing the papacy to Avignon from Rome for what turned out to be nerly 100 years (the Babylonian Captivity as it is known in Church circles) was rather significant. Philip fought wars against Longshanks, patronized William (Braveheart) Wallace as an ally, sent his daughter into her unfortunate marriage for dynastic reasons, was also the target of his grandson Edward III who began the Hundred Years' War against France. While this was going on, it facilitated Robert the Bruce peeling Scotland off of England at the Battle of Bannockburn.
It is claimed that Isabella and her lover took Edward II off his throne and transported him to a castle several miles outside London where he was literally sliced to death, like a salami only from the toes up. It is said that his screams could be heard all over London several miles away and that his killing was done at a leisurely pace over several days. It may be that a hot poker was used as well but that some reporters are a bit squeamish as to detailing the use of that poker.
I confess that I know less than I should about Edward III. I know that he took the throne at about 18 years of age, replacing his mother who had been regent and clamping her in house arrest. Thereafter, she became a nun. Her lover, the French knight and probable father of Edward III was summarily executed by Edward III for participating in in the killing of Edward II. It would have been most impolitic for either Isabella or Edward III to admit Edward III's paternity by a non-royal although Edward II's exclusive faggotry could not have escaped the notice of many.
I am no monarchist but democracy has its limitations too. See Hussein the Insane in the White House.
I think that the Huguenots were treated as they were not because of a ruler's power but rather because their very existence threatened Christendom, a concept of combining Catholic monarchy with Catholic ecclesiastical authority. For example (a totally inadequate one) the Inquisition (a Church institution) inquired, investigated, tried an alleged criminal, made its judgment and turned convicts over to the state for punishment (contrary to general modern opinion). It is for this reason that our generally Protestant Founding Fathers guaranteed freedom of worship and that no religious denomination could be "established" as the official religion of the central government (see Anglicanism in Henry VIII's England and afterwards or Catholicism in Spain).
Of course, freedom of worship guaranteed that the federales need not squabble between Virginia's Anglicanism, Connecticut's Congregationalism, South Carolina's Huguenots, Rhode Island's Baptists, etc., as to which would be the established religion of the federales.
Oh, and Bravheart is a great movie but an ahistorical nightmare. Isabella was about 5 years old when Braveheart was murdered by the Crown and thus Edward III is certainly not Wallace's son as the film suggests. Neil Wallace who wrote Braveheart freely admitted in his Preface that he did not claim it to be historically accurate: a story not of what actually occurred but of what might otherwise have occurred in a parallel universe. Great book. Great film.
If your ancestors settled in New England, then your heritage is probably Catholic.
_________________________________________
HUH ??? 1600s
Only fur trappers in the mid-south...
The Europeans were still on the shore..
The Irish didnt come here to MA and NYC till later...
New york City and New Rochelle ???
Long Island and Staton Island ???
All Huguenot
The first settlers to NYC outside ofd Indians, and fur trappers were Walloons, Protestants from France and Holland, 1623
At that time many French Catholics were going to Canada..
Huguenots were not allowed to go to Canada (French) and who would want to go at that time...
Maryland was Catholic later
New York is not part of New England.
New England had very few Europeans in the 1600s
Who cares? New York is not part of New England.
ROFLMBO
This thread is about the Huguenots...
Why bother with New England if they werent there ???
Your logic is creative at best.
I should have clarified by referring to immigration from Quebec to No. New England. As you correctly point out only Catholics could immigrate to French Canada. A substantial part of the population in No New England is of French Canadian extraction and of Catholic heritage. On the other hand French immigrants further south including the NYC area around the 17th century would have been largely Protestant.
Indeed, Isabella would not have disclosed the French knight as Edward III's father. Her adultery would have amounted to treason punishable by death (although one can well sympathize with her undoubted rage against the fraudulent faggot to whom she had been married off. There was no Edward Wallace but William Wallace was hanged, drawn, quartered and dismembered at the Tower of London for his virtues.
Finally, you can bet that Edward III well knew what his "father" (Edward II) was sexually by at least reputation. He probably also knew that the knight was his father but admitting it would have cost him his crown since he was therefore NOT a Plantagenet. It is good to be king and Edward II's perversions coupled with Isabella's normality and the knight's willingness should not deprive Edward III of a god thing like being king (at least in Edward III's judgment).
As to the Knights Templar, there is plenty of evidence that they were not good guys. In those days, the RCC played some of the more benign roles of international organizations today. I would rather have the papacy as an international moral force without an army of its own than submit to the tyranny of the UN, Tri-Laterals, Bilderbergers and their ilk. I would rather the US be a separate and quite sovereign nation with no formal control over it and as few treaty obligations as possible. I would rather that the US be a separate and sovereign nation and not a Catholic nation as such because those not Catholic have so welcomed us here and have demonstrated the wisdom of their vision of religious freedom that we Catholics should honor them by cherishing and protecting the religious freedom they created here with no demands other than our share of that freedom.
I believe that the Templars were trying to become an international financial and political and MILITARY power to rival or surpass the Vatican in those respects. The Vatican responded by demanding of Philip the Fair the execution of the Templar leaders to nip their threat to the existing order in the bud. Most opposing groups in that age executed their enemies freely when they had the chance. We can study history and understand history and make our own history. We cannot revise history.
Informative post, thanks.
Indeed, Isabella would not have disclosed the French knight as Edward III’s father. Her adultery would have amounted to treason punishable by death (
____________________________________________
Treason yes...
and the Brave Heart story is cute...
Especially when she tells the king that shes preggers and no heir of his son would sit on the throne...
Apparantly in the US the Knights Templars are connected to the zyork ZRite Freemasons
York Rite Freemasons
***There is nothing in western culture remotely close to the Cathar culture for us to see and experience in order to understand why they were a ‘heresy’. But the facts speak for themselves and the Cathar world was a cancer that was metastasizing itself on the body of western tradition.***
A good and accurate summary.
My Huguenot ancestor was a Count - (something or other) de Richebourg.
My mom did all the research many years ago.
de Richebourg.
Many Huguenots were of noble families, even royalty
That name is not listed among the French Huguenots...
It sounds like a German name...
Maybe there was a French variation of the name ???
Or his wife or descendant ???
Do you have another family name ???
I found it on the website you linked above here. Click on the D and scroll down. (Surname - de Richebourg, Christian Name - Claude Phillippe)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.