Posted on 07/04/2012 7:38:25 PM PDT by Gamecock
More than a thousand attendees are expected to gather for a four-day conference to celebrate John Calvin's 500th birthday, reports Michael Ireland, chief correspondent, ASSIST News Service.
As America prepares to celebrate Independence Day this July 4, Vision Forum Ministries will be hosting the national celebration to honor the 500th birthday of John Calvin, a man who many scholars recognize as America's "Founding Father."
The event -- The Reformation 500 Celebration -- will take place July 1-4 at the Park Plaza Hotel in downtown Boston, according to a media release about the event.
"Long before America declared its independence, John Calvin declared and defended principles that birthed liberty in the modern world," noted Doug Phillips, president of Vision Forum Ministries.
"Scholars both critical and sympathetic of the life and theology of Calvin agree on one thing: that this reformer from Geneva was the father of modern liberty as well as the intellectual founding father of America," he said.
Phillips pointed out: "Jean Jacques Rousseau, a fellow Genevan who was no friend to Christianity, observed: 'Those who consider Calvin only as a theologian fail to recognize the breadth of his genius. The editing of our wise laws, in which he had a large share, does him as much credit as his Institutes. . . . [S]o long as the love of country and liberty is not extinct amongst us, the memory of this great man will be held in reverence.'"
He continued: "German historian Leopold von Ranke observed that 'Calvin was virtually the founder of America.' Harvard historian George Bancroft was no less direct with this remark: 'He who will not honor the memory and respect the influence of Calvin knows but little of the origin of American liberty.'
"John Adams, America's second president, agreed with this sentiment and issued this pointed charge: 'Let not Geneva be forgotten or despised. Religious liberty owes it much respect.'
"As we celebrate America's Independence this July 4, we would do well to heed John Adams' admonition and show due respect to the memory of John Calvin whose 500th birthday fall six days later," Phillips stated.
Calvin, a convert to Reformation Christianity born in Noyon, France, on July 10, 1509, is best known for his influence on the city of Geneva, the media release explains.
"It was there that he modeled many of the principles of liberty later embraced by America's Founders, including anti-statism, the belief in transcendent principles of law as the foundation of an ethical legal system, free market economics, decentralized authority, an educated citizenry as a safeguard against tyranny, and republican representative government which was accountable to the people and a higher law," the release states.
The Reformation 500 Celebration will honor Calvin's legacy, along with other key Protestant reformers, and will feature more than thirty history messages on the impact of the Reformation, Faith & Freedom mini-tours of historic Boston, and a Children's Parade.
The festivities will climax on America's Independence Day as attendees join thousands of others for the world-renowned music and fireworks celebration on the Esplanade with the Boston Pops Orchestra.
Good point. Just keep in mind that a woman rides the beast (Rev. 17:2-7).
Actually, a reformed Church, Calvinists all, was established in Florida in 1564, BEFORE the Spanish Romanists settled St. Augustine.
St. Augustine’s founder, Pedro Menéndez de Avilés, BUTCHERED OVER 500 French Hugueonauts who founded a French colony at Fort Caroline (in what is now Jacksonville, FL)....simply because they would not deny their faith and follow Rome.
In two incidents Menéndez fought the Calvinists to a point of surrender, took them prisoner—and offered to spare their lives if they swore allegiance to the Roman Church. When they refused he executed them all.
Salvation - the above post demonstrates to never expect more than half-truths from non-Catholics set on denigrating the church.
From the NPS, here is the truth:
The settlement barely survived that first year. Good relations with the Indians eventually soured and by the following spring the colonists were close to starvation. Twice mutinous parties had sailed off to make their own fortunes and some were eventually captured by the Spanish, revealing the presence of the French colony. The remaining colonists were about to leave Florida in August 1565, when they spotted sails on the horizon. Ribault had arrived with a relief expedition of supplies and 600 soldiers and settlers, including more women and some children.
On learning of Ribault’s departure for Florida, Phillip II of Spain sent Admiral Pedro Menendez to remove the French from Florida. Menendez established a base to the south at St. Augustine. Ribault sailed down the coast seeking to attack the Spanish, but his ships were scattered by a hurricane and beached far to the south.
Seizing the opportunity, Menendez marched north with 500 soldiers to attack the weakly guarded colony. It is believed that the Spanish camped overnight nearby, and attacked early. Forty or fifty French people, including Laudonniere, escaped and sailed for France. Out of the remaining 200 people, only about 60 women and children were spared.
Menendez next marched south and found the shipwrecked Frenchmen, Ribault among them. They threw themselves on his mercy, but to Menendez they were heretics and enemies of his king. At a place later named Matanzas (Slaughter), he put to the sword about 350 men - all but those professing to be Catholics and a few musicians. France never again strongly challenged Spanish claims in North America.
**a reformed Church, Calvinists all, was established in Florida in 1564**
LOL! Nope!
Thanks for the truth.
So, no these were not just innocent Huguenots minding their own business. The King had sent de Avilés to protect Spain's shipping lanes from pirates, including the 2 mutinous groups from Fort Caroline, and to remove the French from Spanish claimed territory.
I'm not sure where exactly you get the information that these particular French Huguenots were pirating. That seems like a slander.
However, the Spaniard Menendez was sent by the Spanish King to remove French colonists from the area. He may have initiated the initial skirmishes which the French Protestants and the Spanish Catholics engaged in. After which the Norman Ribault did attempt to follow Menendez's forces & ships South, but lost all his own ships and many sailors. So he did pursue, looking to fight, but storms busted up that effort.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Caroline
As for Ribault's fleet, all of the ships either sank or ran aground south of St. Augustine during the storm, and many of the Frenchmen onboard were lost at sea. Ribault and his marooned sailors were located by Menéndez and his troops and summoned to surrender. Apparently believing that his men would be well treated, Ribault capitulated. Menéndez then executed Ribault and several hundred Huguenots (French Protestants) as heretics at what is now known as the Matanzas Inlet. The atrocity shocked Europeans even in that bloody era of religious strife.[2] A fort built much later, Fort Matanzas, is in the vicinity of the site. This massacre put an end to France's attempts at colonization of the southeastern Atlantic coast of North America.
So what we see is that Menedez's actions were quite horrific, and much as AnalogReigns characterized it. Perhaps you both might apologize to that freeper? He is quite intelligent, you know? And he brought no untruths here. Menendez engaged in two separate slaughters, adding up to approx 600 victims.
In fact, it does appear that Titanites is the one hoping to spin here, what happened those centuries ago, which is sad, for the slaughtering didn't end with the bloody Spaniard, sent by a Spanish king to do the very thing that he did...
More background; Dominique de Gourgue
Philip II of Spain was a Catholic king who hated Protestants and considered them heretics, including the French Huguenots. His troops were ordered to kill any they found in the colonies. Thus, in 1565 there was a notorious massacre around Fort Caroline in what is now Jacksonville, Florida, by troops under Pedro Menéndez de Avilés. After capturing the fort and slaying nearly all his prisoners, Menéndez hung their bodies on trees, with the inscription, “Not as Frenchmen but as Lutherans.”[2] The massacre aroused indignation in France among Protestants and Roman Catholics alike. The king sent complaints to the Spanish court, but Menéndez and his associates, instead of being punished for the deed, received rewards and honors.
Pretty sick, huh? It disgusted many Catholics, too, but not Phillip II. One cannot but help to wonder how such news contributed to religious animosities in Europe at the time, and for generations afterward. Meanwhile in Florida;
Embittered by the cruelty and indignity that he had received from the Spaniards, de Gourgue determined to avenge the death of his Protestant compatriots, though he was himself a Catholic.[1] He sold everything he had and borrowed money from his brother Antoine in order to recruit a crew and charter three boats. He sailed to Cuba with two hundred men, never telling them the goal of their trip. Once in Cuba he made his intentions clear, and his crew approved his choice of revenge. Gourgue then moved to attack Spanish-held Fort Caroline, which they had renamed as Fort San Mateo, enlisting the aid of Fort Caroline's old allies, the Saturiwa and Tacatacuru, Timucua peoples from the area. The fort soon surrendered to de Gourgues' forces. The French and Indians killed the Spanish prisoners in retribution for the Fort Caroline and other massacres of Protestants.[3] They hung the garrison with the inscription, “Not as Spaniards but as murderers".
From such as the above, we can see clearly that in this particular instance, it most certainly is not the case that the info is merely
In fact, it appears that quite the opposite sort of thing is occurring on this thread, but this time, with yet another repeated refrain of "but the Huguenots started it!" employed as a cover-up or excuse for mass slaughter of Protestants by Catholics being unjustifiable, unless one wishes to consider the killings more as continuance of the wars of religion being fought in Europe in that century.
Real groundbreakers, those Spaniards of old.
The truth often seems like slander to those who cannot see. You can read some here:
From Fort Caroline, the freebooters went out and raided not only Spanish merchants and treasure ships but Spanish cities as well. Cartagena and Panama in South America both fell prey to the Protestant pirates. Cuba was hit particularly hard - probably due to proximity - with both Santiago and the well established capital of Havana sacked and plundered.
Of course the Spanish weren't going to hold still for all these Froggy shenanigans. In 1565 King Philip II sent a force led by Captain General Pedro de Menendez of Avilles to deal with the problem. 30 ships left Cadiz in June carrying a force of 2,000 soldiers along with upwards of 500 settlers. The Captain General was charged by the king to handle the pirate problem and establish a Spanish fort in "The Florida". De Menendez was the right man for the job not only because of his ruthlessness but his business interests as well. He owned several merchant ships, one of which had recently gone missing in the area of Fort Caroline with his own son aboard.
And here:
The Huguenots were naturally interested in capturing Spanish galleons.
After the Spanish instituted their treasure fleet, the French continued their attacks on vessels, but it became much more difficult to accomplish their felonious tasks. After Jean Fleury was captured during an attack in 1527 and hanged as a pirate, the French privateers realized that while ships were becoming more and more difficult to capture, Spanish port cities were much easier targets. This changed the Huguenots' strategies significantly. As long as they timed their raids correctly, the Huguenots would be able to capture much of the Spanish treasure before it ever reached the treasure fleet. This plan of action paid off handsomely as they proceeded to attack ports in Puerto Rico, Havana, and Cartagena (modern-day Colombia), collecting an impressive amount of pirate booty.
Fort Caroline
As the religious civil war in France continued, many French Protestants found themselves exiled. In 1564, a group of them settled on Florida's coast, calling their new home Fort Caroline. Unlike most settlers whose ambition was to work the land, this group was comprised of soldiers and tradesmen who planned to use the area as a base from which pirate raids on both Spanish ships and Spanish ports could easily be conducted. Unfortunately for the French, the Spanish were growing tired of the Huguenot pirates, and they decided it was time to settle the score.
In April of 1562, King Philip II sent Spanish nobleman Pedro Menendez de Avilles to the territories of the Spanish Main. Menendez was named the Captain General of the Spanish fleet, and his mission was to catch any pirates he could and deal with them ruthlessly. Menendez and his brother owned several merchant ships and he was very familiar with both trading and security. He made immediate recommendations that the port cities should be fortified, and that armed ships be on patrol in the Caribbean to protect the ports and ships while they were there.
So what we see is that Menedez's actions were quite horrific.
Yes horrific, but he killed only soldiers/pirates and let the women and children go. I suppose you can believe that if Ribault had reached Menedez’s outpost successfully he would not have killed any of them.
Perhaps you both might apologize to that freeper?
I don’t apologize for truth telling.
He is quite intelligent, you know?
That is a relative assessment that really has no meaning to anyone but yourself.
And he brought no untruths here.
No, just half-truths.
In fact, it does appear that Titanites is the one hoping to spin here.
The truth seems like spin to some.
Pretty sick, huh?
Yes, sick, but done to those murdering pirates were occupying Spanish territory, pirating Spanish ships and plundering Spanish settlements, and who had pirated Menedez’s own ships and killed his son.
From a [U.S.] National Park Service link which you yourself have cited here previous;
Presumed wannabe pirate but a Catholic, or simply being a fiddle player -- then ok, but a Huguenot? Death to ye.
As I mentioned before, much of this can be seen as carry-over from the religious wars in Europe at the time.
Yes, sick, but done to those murdering pirates were occupying Spanish territory, pirating Spanish ships and plundering Spanish settlements, and who had pirated Menedez’s own ships and killed his son.
Spanish territory? Yea, and the Moon belonged to the U.S. after the astronauts planted a flag, and spent a few nights there.
Murdering pirates? Unless a Catholic, then hey, that's different...
Perhaps one could rename the so-called "Bush Doctrine" the King Phillipe of Spain doctrine? No, wait --- the Bush doctrine did not include a "kill them all" clause in regards to those of a different religion. The Spaniard's did.
The blog like you offered, Pauline's Pirates & Privateers has a slightly different version than most other accounts, in that it is claimed A mass grave was dug for these men and over it de Menendez erected a marker which read: "I do this not to Frenchmen but to heretics.
Note that he did not say "pirates".
The executioner himself declaring himself doing such not to Frenchmen (whom otherwise may be entitled to some decency?) nor to pirates, (either caught in the act or convicted at trial before execution?) but to "heretics". Other accounts say he left them not buried, but "hanging in the trees". Since this reportedly shocked both Catholic and Protestant, even during a period which had seen a great many other atrocities having been committed in religious warfare, I'll go with that it was at least believed/i> in Europe at the time, that he left them hanging in trees, declaring them heretics, and most likely did so too, for that matter.
Tell me again about truth often seems like slander to those who cannot see?
I did no such thing. Look at how many times in my posts they've been called Huguenots. They were Huguenots and they were pirates. The only thing being portrayed in the original post is that they were Huguenots.Presumed wannabe pirates
There's no presumption about it.
Spanish territory?
Whether you want to believe it was Spanish territory or not is irrelevant. The Spanish perceived it as theirs, and they set out to protect it.
Note that he did not say "pirates".
Would it have changed anything if he had? The fact is they were. The fact is he didn't like heretics. They were both to him, and they had pirated his own ships and taken his son. I wouldn't doubt he had some hatred against them.
Tell me again about truth often seems like slander to those who cannot see?
I haven't denied the religious component, and have in fact linked to discussion about it as you have shown. I don't deny it. However, that was not the only factor. I was not the one portraying these people as just Huguenots simply seeking to practice their religion. They were pirates plundering Spanish settlements and ships. Bad things happen to criminals. These were thieves and bad things happened to them. My argument is with portraying them as simply religious people minding their own business.
I'll go with that
I wouldn't suspect you'd do anything less. If you want to proceed with portraying these people as just peaceful Huguenots minding their own business, you have the right to do so. It would be a denial of the truth, but don't let that interfere. I can understand why some might be upset that Ribault was not the one who was successful in his initial attack, but that's history.
You cannot ignore the alliance between Islam and Protestantism and how that would have been viewed by King Philip II. Spain had been in a 700 year war with Islam and was still fighting Islam throughout the Mediterranean and the Asian trade routes. The prospect of allies of Islam operating openly freely near its major trade routes was not acceptable.
On a personal level Philip II was the son of Emperor Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire. The Holy Roman Empire was then fighting both Ottoman expansion into Europe and active wars with Protestants across the continent.
Lastly, in the New World, the Spanish had encountered the most Satanic elements ever witnessed by Christendom in the Aztec empire. To a people who believed that the only difference between humans and animals was a soul those whom they believed had willingly forfeited their souls by rejecting Catholicism were no better than animals. Their treatment by the Spanish military reflected this.
This behavior was not exclusive to the Spanish or Catholics. While French Huguenots were being killed by Spain, Irish Catholic men, women and children were being killed in much larger numbers as an intentional strategy because of their religion for residing in a town that refused to surrender. Where Menéndez spared the women and children and sent them by ship to Havana, no such mercy was shown by Cromwell.
Peace be with you
Not exactly, according to all historical accounts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Augustine,_Florida
Would it have changed anything if he had?
Hard to say, but it would not have been as damaging if he had stuck to the "here be pirates" thesis you openly prefer, rather than the "here be heretics" declaration which he brazenly did.
His doing so lends more credence to the thing being one of religion & empire, rather than a just policing of criminal matters.
Who knows? Without this additional act of hatred, more fuel for the fire of religious/political power struggles, perhaps even the later St. Batholomew's Day Massacre itself could have been avoided? And if so, the world may well have been able to retain Gaspard II de Coligny's written history of the French civil wars of that period, for it was burned by Catherine de' Medici(?) after his murder. I guess she wanted to cover a few people's tracks, eh?
On a more practical note perhaps, if the slaughter had not had such fiercely religious overtones, then the later mistrust of Catholics in the developing New World colonies would have had one less bloody massacre, historical "incident" to serve as cause for such mistrust, which only later and slowly were overcome.
"...If you want to proceed with portraying these people as just peaceful Huguenots minding their own business..." Putting words in my mouth? What's up with that?
"...It would be a denial of the truth, but don't let that interfere..." Ok, so now I see. You think I said;
That wasn't me, and I have no direct source for that at this time, but there are strong hints in the information we have both viewed, that that too very likely occurred.
Right now I'm reading about Czarnagóra (Montenegro) -- now most of the people there consider themselves Serbs and speak Serbian, but due to being seperated for 600 years (due to the Turkish invasion), they are slowly separating. Ditto for the east slavs -- "russians" in the lower case are all east slavs: Ukrainians, Belarussians, "Russians" -- but they are no longer the same people and haven't been the same since Kievan Rus, before the Mongol invasions
=======
Secular humanism is a false religion. My belief is that mankind needs a religion, a belief, in something. If they don't have God, they will invent it (the television) or the state.
I went for a civil marriage in Poland recently and the civil marriage ceremony dates from communist times. The funny thing to me was that the words are EXACTLY the same as a Church wedding, only instead of pledging to God, you pledge to the State
it's a replacement of God by State
This is what Obama is doing, what the Bolsheviks did, what Bismarck's welfare state unwittingly did.
The USA was always a mixed religious state, whether we like it or not, but based on Judeo-Christian values that are common to us all except to Mormons (Polygamy) and Islam (well... duuuh)
We have seen the state creeping in our lifetime to taking over everything. and if we don't stop it this year, I strongly predict a third-world USA in 2020 (i.e. if we have Obama 2.0)....
Wild screaming on either side does nothing. in fact the more one demonises the other, the more it makes the other want to resist.
your statement should read French Protestants and the Spanish Catholics
Secondly, note what you yourself posted , launching a surprise dawn attack on the Fort Caroline garrison --> an attack on a garrison. This was war
Thirdly, Philip II of Spain was a Catholic king who hated Protestants is overly simplistic. Protestantism never spread in Spain or Italy due to cultural reasons. The austereness didn't ring a bell and also the Papacy was considered close enough to "be one of their own".
Where was Philip threated by Protestantism? In the Netherlands where there was the 100 years war in which the Flemish (Dutch and northern Belgians) were fighting to be separated from Habsburg domination. The differences were political, regional, cultural and by accepting calvinism, it added another separation between the two peoples.
in the case of France, they most certainly DID -- The Huguenots make a big sob story about their reparations but never mention that they were the losing side in a war in which they fired the first shot
let's trace the Huguenots, shall we. In france, under Francis I, France was tolerant of all religious views
however, what did the Huguenots do? In the affair of the placards they posted placards all over Paris and even on the bedchamber door of the king (a security breach that angered him and made him change his tolerance position) -- these placards were attacks on Catholics.
So, instead of discussing, the Huguenots went to attack the Catholic majority who until then were content to let them live and debate and discuss and debate. Incidently, until this time the Huguenots were increasing, like the Moslems in Bradford, but then they started to get shrill and wake people up with their attacks
This polemic was an attack and the Huguenots started this retaliation.This was in 1534
Next, came the French wars of religion in which the Huguenots conspired against the King. This, added to the previous attack meant that they now publically came to attack the conservative forces. The progressives of the Huguenots were the precursors of the Revolutionaires
The people who became Huguenots were primarily the urban elite, like our present-day New Yorkers who take a fad and they saw that this was a means to oppose the King, so Huguenotism became a political tool
A group of Huguenots tried to kidnap the Prince Francis II when his father died -- causing more antagonism.
Huguenots in 1560 attacked Catholic Churchs and destroyed properties in Rouen and La Rochelle -- thus the FIRST salvo was lobbed by the Huguenots. -- the Catholics retailiated with mobs at seeing their places of worship attacked and defiled by Huguenots
Next, in 1562-70, we have the wars -- now political-religious, so no, it was not a simple case of "persecution" --> The Huguenots were one side of a civil war, which they lost
Now, let's come to the juicy part, the St. Bart's day massacre -- this occured in 1572, 40 years after the first provocations by the Huguenots and 12 years after they started destroying Catholic Churchs (just like the Moslems in America they were quiet until their numbers grew)
now, King Charles XI was openly in favor of the Huguenots -- so a political moment. Hence the attacks on the opposing side
So, let's see in conclusion -- Huguenots first start their provocations in 1534, then in 1560 start attacking Catholic Churchs (with no provocation), then start their political support against the conservatives and start a civil war. After 12 years their side loses the civil war and yet they are still allowed to live and practise their faith (note this is the 1500s, not a nice time, yet they get this tolerance) -- but they still play political intrigues. So, one faction starts to attack and massacre the other faction
so, stop the entire "poor persecuted Huguenots" -- they brought it on themselves. the Huguenots after doing their persecuting of Catholics, got retaliation, then they went to England and many to South Africa where they were among the racists enforcing Apartheid.
Many came to the US and Germany as well.
In England and Germany they were Calvinists in non-Calvinist lands, but no "persecution". In the US they were one of many and no, no "persecutions". In South Africa they were one of the folks doing the persecutions and in Northern Germany they enthusiastically participated in the Kulturkampf.
what persecution did they face once they left France?
As shown above (and you can check the facts for yourself), the Huguenots were the one who bit the hand that fed them, then launched the first attacks, started a civil war and then lost
They were like the Moslems in present day France -- slowly starting, making nice noises, but then attacking Christian churchs and finally starting a civil war.
They lost, tough luck --- the losers in the 1500s were not given much graces, yet they were allowed to stay with the same acts of tolerance AFTER losing politically. Yet they continued supporting political intrigues and there was a political massacre.
The Huguenots were on the losing side, so they got killed like the Catholics in England or in Scandanavia.
It was the 1500s, a pretty barbaric time
The mass killings of the Huguenots were done at the hands of rioters in a pogrom after it was learned that the Huguenots were conspiring with the English to stage a coup and facilitate an invasion. It is never healthy to conspire against a sitting king.
The French king didn't care if these were Protestants or not, they were fighting against the enemy (so what if Spain was Catholic, they were the enemy of the French king).
Wikipedia is hardly "all historical accounts".
Hard to say, but it would not have been as damaging if he had stuck to the "here be pirates" thesis you openly prefer, rather than the "here be heretics" declaration which he brazenly did. His doing so lends more credence to the thing being one of religion & empire, rather than a just policing of criminal matters.
I don't openly prefer anything but the truth. That they were Huguenots is secondary. Spain was at war with France, and their shipping lanes were being pirated by the French. To help resolve this matter, the King sent Menendez to clear them from Florida not simply because they were Huguenots, but to protect his interests.
Who knows? Without this additional act of hatred, more fuel for the fire of religious/political power struggles, perhaps even the later St. Batholomew's Day Massacre itself could have been avoided?
That is pure speculation that is very improbable. The Huguenots turning against the French Monarchy, the invasion of a Huguenot army into Hainault, and the attempted assassination of Coligny all led up to the massacre.
I guess she wanted to cover a few people's tracks, eh?
On a more practical note perhaps, if the slaughter had not had such fiercely religious overtones, then the later mistrust of Catholics in the developing New World colonies would have had one less bloody massacre, historical "incident" to serve as cause for such mistrust, which only later and slowly were overcome.
Rumors and silly theories don't make for accurate history.
there are strong hints in the information we have both viewed, that that too very likely occurred.
They aren't that strong. But even if it were true, it would just be a side story that Protestants would squeeze for all its worth. We know the reason Menendez was sent by the King to clear them from Florida was because they were French interlopers threatening the shipping lanes. Not because they were Huguenots.
Liberal Headline: Catholics massacre Huguenots building a church in Florida.
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.