CALVINISM IN AMERICA [Happy "Presbyterian Rebellion" Day, everybody!]

When we come to study the influence of Calvinism as a political force in the history of the United States we come to one of the brightest pages of all Calvinistic history. Calvinism came to America in the Mayflower, and Bancroft, the greatest of American historians, pronounces the Pilgrim Fathers "Calvinists in their faith according to the straightest system."¹ John Endicott, the first governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; John Winthrop, the second governor of that Colony; Thomas Hooker, the founder of Connecticut; John Davenport, the founder of the New Haven Colony; and Roger Williams, the founder of the Rhode Island Colony, were all Calvinists. William Penn was a disciple of the Huguenots. It is estimated that of the 3,000,000 Americans at the time of the American Revolution, 900,000 were of Scotch or Scotch-Irish origin, 600,000 were Puritan English, and 400,000 were German or Dutch Reformed. In addition to this the Episcopalians had a Calvinistic confession in their Thirty-nine Articles; and many French Huguenots also had come to this western world. Thus we see that about two-thirds of the colonial population had been trained in the school of Calvin. Never in the world's history had a nation been founded by such people as these. Furthermore these people came to America not primarily for commercial gain or advantage, but because of deep religious convictions. It seems that the religious persecutions in various European countries had been providentially used to select out the most progressive and enlightened people for the colonization of America. At any rate it is quite generally admitted that the English, Scotch, Germans, and Dutch have been the most masterful people of Europe. Let it be especially remembered that the Puritans, who formed the great bulk of the settlers in New England, brought with them a Calvinistic Protestantism, that they were truly devoted to the doctrines of the great Reformers, that they had an aversion for formalism and oppression whether in the Church or in the State, and that in New England Calvinism remained the ruling theology throughout the entire Colonial period.

With this background we shall not be surprised to find that the Presbyterians took a very prominent part in the American Revolution. Our own historian Bancroft says: "The Revolution of 1776, so far as it was affected by religion, was a Presbyterian measure. It was the natural outgrowth of the principles which the Presbyterianism of the Old World planted in her sons, the English Puritans, the Scotch Covenanters, the French Huguenots, the Dutch Calvinists, and the Presbyterians of Ulster." So intense, universal, and aggressive were the Presbyterians in their zeal for liberty that the war was spoken of in England as "The Presbyterian Rebellion." An ardent colonial supporter of King George III wrote home: "I fix all the blame for these extraordinary proceedings upon the Presbyterians. They have been the chief and principal instruments in all these flaming measures. They always do and ever will act against government from that restless and turbulent anti-monarchial spirit which has always distinguished them everywhere."² When the news of "these extraordinary proceedings" reached England, Prime Minister Horace Walpole said in Parliament, "Cousin America has run off with a Presbyterian parson" (John Witherspoon, president of Princeton, signer of Declaration of Independence).

History is eloquent in declaring that American democracy was born of Christianity and that that Christianity was Calvinism. The great Revolutionary conflict which resulted in the formation of the American nation, was carried out mainly by Calvinists, many of whom had been trained in the rigidly Presbyterian College at Princeton, and this nation is their gift to all liberty loving people.

J. R. Sizoo tells us: "When Cornwallis was driven back to ultimate retreat and surrender at Yorktown, all of the colonels of the Colonial Army but one were Presbyterian elders. More than one-half of all the soldiers and officers of the American Army during the Revolution were Presbyterians."³

The testimony of Emilio Castelar, the famous Spanish statesman, orator and scholar, is interesting and valuable. Castelar had been professor of Philosophy in the University of Madrid before he entered politics, and he was made president of the republic which was set up by the Liberals in 1873. As a Roman Catholic he hated Calvin and Calvinism. Says he: "It was necessary for the republican movement that there should come a morality more austere than Luther's, the morality of Calvin, and a Church more democratic than the German, the Church of Geneva. The Anglo-Saxon democracy has for its lineage a book of a primitive society — the Bible. It is the product of a severe theology learned by the few Christian fugitives in the gloomy cities of Holland and Switzerland, where the morose shade of Calvin still wanders . . . And it remains serenely in its grandeur, forming the most dignified, most moral and most enlightened portion of the human race."⁴

Says Motley: "In England the seeds of liberty, wrapped up in Calvinism and hoarded through many trying years, were at last destined to float over land and sea, and to bear the largest harvests of temperate freedom for great commonwealths that were still unborn.⁵ "The Calvinists founded the commonwealths of England, of Holland, and America." And again, "To Calvinists more than to any other class of men, the political liberties of England, Holland and America are due."⁶

The testimony of another famous historian, the Frenchman Taine, who himself held no religious faith, is worthy of consideration. Concerning the Calvinists he said: "These men are the true heroes of England. They founded England, in spite of the corruption of the Stuarts, by the exercise of duty, by the practice of justice, by obstinate toil, by vindication of right, by resistance to oppression, by the conquest of liberty, by the repression of vice. They founded Scotland; they founded the United States; at this day they are, by their descendants, founding Australia and colonizing the world."⁷

In his book, "The Creed of Presbyterians," E. W. Smith asks concerning the American colonists, "Where learned they those immortal principles of the rights of man, of human liberty, equality and self-government, on which they based their Republic, and which form today the distinctive glory of our American civilization ? In the school of Calvin they learned them. There the modern world learned them. So history teaches," (p. 121).

We shall now pass on to consider the influence which the Presbyterian Church as a Church exerted in the formation of the Republic. "The Presbyterian Church," said Dr. W. H. Roberts in an address before the General Assembly, "was for three-quarters of a century the sole representative upon this continent of republican government as now organized in the nation." And then he continues: "From 1706 to the opening of the revolutionary struggle the only body in existence which stood for our present national political organization was the General Synod of the American Presbyterian Church. It alone among ecclesiastical and political colonial organizations exercised authority, derived from the colonists themselves, over bodies of Americans scattered through all the colonies from New England to Georgia. The colonies in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it is to be remembered, while all dependent upon Great Britain, were independent of each other. Such a body as the Continental Congress did not exist until 1774. The religious condition of the country was similar to the political. The Congregational Churches of New England had no connection with each other, and had no power apart from the civil government. The Episcopal Church was without organization in the colonies, was dependent for support and a ministry on the Established Church of England, and was filled with an intense loyalty to the British monarchy. The Reformed Dutch Church did not become an efficient and independent organization until 1771, and the German Reformed Church did not attain to that condition until 1793. The Baptist Churches were separate organizations, the Methodists were practically unknown, and the Quakers were non-combatants."

Delegates met every year in the General Synod, and as Dr. Roberts tells us, the Church became "a bond of union and correspondence between large elements in the population of the divided colonies." "Is it any wonder," he continues, "that under its fostering influence the sentiments of true liberty, as well as the tenets of a sound gospel, were preached throughout the territory from Long Island to South Carolina, and that above all a feeling of unity between the Colonies began slowly but surely to assert itself? Too much emphasis cannot be laid, in connection with the origin of the nation, upon the influence of that ecclesiastical republic, which from 1706 to 1774 was the only representative on this continent of fully developed federal republican institutions. The United States of America owes much to that oldest of American Republics, the Presbyterian Church."⁸

It is, of course, not claimed that the Presbyterian Church was the only source from which sprang the principles upon which this republic is founded, but it is claimed that the principles found in the Westminster Standards were the chief basis for the republic, and that "The Presbyterian Church taught, practiced, and maintained in fulness, first in this land that form of government in accordance with which the Republic has been organized." (Roberts).

The opening of the Revolutionary struggle found the Presbyterian ministers and churches lined up solidly on the side of the colonists, and Bancroft accredits them with having made the first bold move toward independence.⁹The synod which assembled in Philadelphia in 1775 was the first religious body to declare openly and publicly for a separation from England. It urged the people under its jurisdiction to leave nothing undone that would promote the end in view, and called upon them to pray for the Congress which was then in session.

The Episcopalian Church was then still united with the Church of England, and it opposed the Revolution. A considerable number of individuals within that Church, however, labored earnestly for independence and gave of their wealth and influence to secure it. It is to be remembered also that the Commander-in-Chief of the American armies, "the father of our country," was a member of her household. Washington himself attended, and ordered all of his men to attend the services of his chaplains, who were clergymen from the various churches. He gave forty thousand dollars to establish a Presbyterian College in his native state, which took his name in honor of the gift and became Washington College.

N. S. McFetridge has thrown light upon another major development of the Revolutionary period. For the sake of accuracy and completeness we shall take the privilege of quoting him rather extensively. "Another important factor in the independent movement," says he, "was what is known as the 'Mecklenburg Declaration,' proclaimed by the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians of North Carolina, May 20, 1775, more than a year before the Declaration (of Independence) of Congress. It was the fresh, hearty greeting of the Scotch-Irish to their struggling brethren in the North, and their bold challenge to the power of England. They had been keenly watching the progress of the contest between the colonies and the Crown, and when they heard of the address presented by the Congress to the King, declaring the colonies in actual rebellion, they deemed it time for patriots to speak. Accordingly, they called a representative body together in Charlotte, N. C., which by unanimous resolution declared the people free and independent, and that all laws and commissions from the king were henceforth null and void. In their Declaration were such resolutions as these: 'We do hereby dissolve the political bands which have connected us with the mother-country, and hereby absolve ourselves from all allegiance to the British crown' .... 'We hereby declare ourselves a free and independent people; are, and of right ought to be, a sovereign and self-governing association, under control of no power other than that of our God and the general government of Congress; to the maintenance of which we solemnly pledge to each other our mutual cooperation and our lives, our fortunes and our most sacred honor.' ... That assembly was composed of twenty-seven staunch Calvinists, just one-third of whom were ruling elders in the Presbyterian Church, including the president and secretary; and one was a Presbyterian clergyman. The man who drew up that famous and important document was the secretary, Ephraim Brevard, a ruling elder of the Presbyterian Church and a graduate of Princeton College. Bancroft says of it that it was, 'in effect, a declaration as well as a complete system of government.' (U.S. Hist. VIII, 40). It was sent by special messenger to the Congress in Philadelphia, and was published in the Cape Fear Mercury, and was widely distributed throughout the land. Of course it was speedily transmitted to England, where it became the cause of intense excitement.

"The identity of sentiment and similarity of expression in this Declaration and the great Declaration written by Jefferson could not escape the eye of the historian; hence Tucker, in his Life of Jefferson, says: 'Everyone must be persuaded that one of these papers must have been borrowed from the other.' But it is certain that Brevard could not have 'borrowed' from Jefferson, for he wrote more than a year before Jefferson; hence Jefferson, according to his biographer, must have 'borrowed' from Brevard. But it was a happy plagiarism, for which the world will freely forgive him. In correcting his first draft of the Declaration it can be seen, in at least a few places, that Jefferson has erased the original words and inserted those which are first found in the Mecklenberg Declaration. No one can doubt that Jefferson had Brevard's resolutions before him when he was writing his immortal Declaration."¹⁰

This striking similarity between the principles set forth in the Form of Government of the Presbyterian Church and those set forth in the Constitution of the United States has caused much comment. "When the fathers of our Republic sat down to frame a system of representative and popular government," says Dr. E. W. Smith, "their task was not so difficult as some have imagined. They had a model to work by."¹¹

"If the average American citizen were asked, who was the founder of America, the true author of our great Republic, he might be puzzled to answer. We can imagine his amazement at hearing the answer given to this question by the famous German historian, Ranke, one of the profoundest scholars of modern times. Says Ranke, 'John Calvin was the virtual founder of America.'"¹²

D'Aubigne, whose history of the Reformation is a classic, writes: "Calvin was the founder of the greatest of republics. The Pilgrims who left their country in the reign of James I, and landing on the barren soil of New England, founded populous and mighty colonies, were his sons, his direct and legitimate sons; and that American nation which we have seen growing so rapidly boasts as its father the humble Reformer on the shore of Lake Leman."¹³

Dr. E. W. Smith says, "These revolutionary principles of republican liberty and self-government, taught and embodied in the system of Calvin, were brought to America, and in this new land where they have borne so mighty a harvest were planted, by whose hands? — the hands of the Calvinists. The vital relation of Calvin and Calvinism to the founding of the free institutions of America, however strange in some ears the statement of Ranke may have sounded, is recognized and affirmed by historians of all lands and creeds."¹⁴

All this has been thoroughly understood and candidly acknowledged by such penetrating and philosophic historians as Bancroft, who far though he was from being Calvinistic in his own personal convictions, simply calls Calvin "the father of America," and adds: "He who will not honor the memory and respect the influence of Calvin knows but little of the origin of American liberty."

When we remember that two-thirds of the population at the time of the Revolution had been trained in the school of Calvin, and when we remember how unitedly and enthusiastically the Calvinists labored for the cause of independence, we readily see how true are the above testimonies.

There were practically no Methodists in America at the time of the Revolution; and, in fact, the Methodist Church was not officially organized as such in England until the year 1784, which was three years after the American Revolution closed. John Wesley, great and good man though he was, was a Tory and a believer in political non-resistance. He wrote against the American "rebellion," but accepted the providential result. McFetridge tells us: "The Methodists had hardly a foothold in the colonies when the war began. In 1773 they claimed about one hundred and sixty members. Their ministers were almost all, if not all, from England, and were staunch supporters of the Crown against American Independence. Hence, when the war broke out they were compelled to fly from the country. Their political views were naturally in accord with those of their great leader, John Wesley, who wielded all the power of his eloquence and influence against the independence of the colonies. (Bancroft, Hist. U.S., Vol. VII, p. 261.) He did not foresee that independent America was to be the field on which his noble Church was to reap her largest harvests, and that in that Declaration which he so earnestly opposed lay the security of the liberties of his followers."¹⁵

In England and America the great struggles for civil and religious liberty were nursed in Calvinism, inspired by Calvinism, and carried out largely by men who were Calvinists. And because the majority of historians have never made a serious study of Calvinism they have never been able to give us a truthful and complete account of what it has done in these countries. Only the light of historical investigation is needed to show us how our forefathers believed in it and were controlled by it. We live in a day when the services of the Calvinists in the founding of this country have been largely forgotten, and one can hardly treat of this subject without appearing to be a mere eulogizer of Calvinism. We may well do honor to that Creed which has borne such sweet fruits and to which America owes so much.

¹Hist. U. S., I, p. 463.
²Presbyterians and the Revolution, p. 49.
³They Seek a Country, J. G. Slosser, editor, p. 155.
⁴Harper's Monthly. June and July, 1872.
⁵The'United Netherlands, III., p. 121.
⁶The United Netherlands, IV., pp. 548, 547.
⁷English Literature, II., p. 472.
⁸Address on, "The Westminster Standards and the Formation of the American Republic.
⁹Hist. U.S., X., p. 77.
¹⁰Calvinism in History, pp. 85-88.
¹¹The Creed of Presbyterians, p. 142.
¹²Id. p. 119.
¹³Reformation in the Time of Calvin, I., p. 5.
¹⁴The Creed of Presbyterians, p. 132.
¹⁵Calvinism in History, p. 74.

I find this strange to be pulling denominations apart and promoting divisions on a day when we could be joining together to celebrate the freedom we DO HAVE to worship as we please.

Independence Day

Independence Day (USA)
[In the dioceses of the United States]
Optional Memorial
July 4th

The National Hymn | Pledge of Allegiance

On this day Americans commemorate the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, which took place on July 4, 1776. The church in the U.S. incorporated this observance into the liturgy with a special mass asking for peace, justice, and truth. (Source: Daily Roman Missal, Edited by Rev. James Socías, Midwest Theological Forum, Chicago, Illinois ©2003)
Collect:
God of love, Father of us all
in wisdom and goodness you guide creation
to fulfillment in Christ your Son.
Open our hearts to the truth of His gospel,
that your peace may rule in our hearts
and your justice guide our lives.
Grant this through our Lord Jesus Christ, Your Son,
who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit,
one God, forever and ever. Amen.

Readings: from Masses for Various Occasions & Needs (For Public Needs)

See section on this site: Catholics and Political Responsibility
Making Words Count - Voters must be mindful of media manipulation Michaelmas 2002 Vol. XVII, No. 3

The Flag Salute
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands:
One nation under God, indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all.

The "flag salute" was composed by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister, and was first published in the Youth Companion magazine in 1892. In 1923, "of the United States of America" was added; and in 1954, the phrase "under God".

The phrase "under God" has been challenged. In late June 2002, a decision by a judge of the 9th Circuit Court declared "under God" unconstitutional, though following an immediate and enormous public outcry from Americans everywhere, he stayed his own decision.

June 21, 2003 - Update from the Ventura County Star - California Governor Gray Davis has asked the US Supreme Court to review the decision banning the Pledge. The review is based on "national cultural" and "social importance".

June 14, 2004: The US Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiff, Newdow, had insufficient legal standing to sue, thus the Court avoided deciding the merits of the case. Thus "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is retained.

Copy of the Decision at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/

Elk Grove Unified School Dist. v. Newdow http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14june20041230/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/03pdf/02-1624.pdf

TALENT & AKIN ANNOUNCE PROTECT THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BILL
Wednesday, July 2, 2003

(ST. CHARLES, MO) US Senator Jim Talent (R-Mo.) and Congressman Todd Akin (R-Mo.) today announced legislation they have introduced in the US Congress to protect the Pledge of Allegiance at a pro-Pledge rally in St. Charles.

Sen. Talent and Rep. Akin have introduced the Protect the Pledge Act of 2003 (S. 1297/H.R. 2028), which would regulate the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts, such as San Francisco's Ninth Circuit Court, to hear cases that challenge the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance.

"I believe it is the responsibility of Congress to protect the Constitution and the Pledge of Allegiance", Talent said. "The Senate voted unanimously to support the use of 'under God' in the Pledge, but in my judgment we should do more. The Protect the Pledge Act preserves and protects individual rights to affirm their beliefs and pledge their allegiance to the flag while making certain that no person would ever be forced to say 'under God' when reciting the Pledge. I am optimistic that we can rally Congress to defend the Constitution and protect the Pledge by limiting the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts.

Talent and Akin's legislation removes the issue of the Pledge of Allegiance's constitutionality from the jurisdiction of federal district and appeals courts, while maintaining the jurisdiction of state courts and the U.S. Supreme Court over such cases.

Under Article III of the Constitution, Congress has the power to regulate the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts as a check in our government's system of checks and balances. In the past, Congress has used this power to prevent or overrule judicial abuse in administration of the environmental, immigration, and labor laws.

The effect of Talent and Akin's legislation would be to overrule the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which ruled, in what is now an infamous case, that the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional because it uses the phrase "one nation under God.
Source:http://talent.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=205732

The National Hymn
God of our Fathers

They, like Calvinists, didn't believe in missionary work...

Calvinists didn't believe in missionary work?

First, this is what Calvin himself said about evangelism: “It is no small consolation to godly teachers that, although the larger part of the world does not listen to Christ, He has His sheep whom He knows and by whom He is also known. They (all preachers) must do their utmost to bring the whole world into Christ’s fold, but when they do not succeed as they would wish, they must be satisfied with the single thought that those who are sheep will be collected together by their work.” (Calvin’s Commentary on John 17:9).
Second, Calvin evangelized neighboring France. At the beginning of the reformation in 1555, there was only one church. In 1562 Calvin’s movement had led to the formation of 2150 local protestant congregations in an area hostile to protestants Christians.
Third, Calvin himself sent out more worldwide missionaries than most Arminian churches today. Historians have called his Geneva a “hub of vast missionary enterprise” (Frank A. James, III, “Calvin and Missions,” Christian History, 5 no. 4 (Fall 1986) : 23.) For example, historical records show that just in one year, 142 missionaries were sent out by Calvin to go around the world and reach people with the gospel message. Some were even sent to Brazil where they were killed. (Hughes, “John Calvin: D. O. M,” 46; cf. also McGrath, 184).
Fourth, the modern missionary movement as we have come to know it, was founded and stimulated by William Carey, a Calvinist! Today he is called “the father of modern missions” after spending 58 years of his life on Indian soil preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, a great majority of early missionaries were Calvinists, men like David Brainerd, John G. Paton, Henry Martyn and a host of others. Hundreds of Calvinists were martyred and died sharing the good news of Jesus to sinners. Looking through the history of our modern world we can see that at all times Calvinists have eagerly taken the gospel to nations and people all over the world, from missionaries who died in small tribes, to great revivals and awakenings that swept the western world, reformed Christians have been at the forefront of mission and evangelism work, proclaiming salvation to those enslaved to sin.
With apostle Paul reformed Christians say ”For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory.” (2 Tim 2:10)
7 misconceptions people hold about Calvinism

And this is not even to mention the tremendous missionary ministries of men such as Gerorge Whitfield, Theodore Frelinghuysen, a Dutch reformed Pietist, Gilbert Tennent and Jonathan Edwards, staunch Calvinists all, which were so used by God in what we know as the Great Awakening.

Cordially,

Were you aware that George Washington may have become a Catholic?

No, I wasn't aware of that possibility. It wouldn't diminish him one iota, as far as I'm concerned.

Certainly, he was highly regarded by most all of his peers.

An interesting man, not without his own inner conflicts and struggles, although quiet and reticent about such, mentioning them only briefly.

He knew government by it's nature included the claimed powers to commit violence. He fought against such a government, yet fought to institute another which would make the same claim of power. I get the impression he was smart enough to realize the possibility that the "new" could grow to become as bad as the "old".

Such a similar mindset helped guide the framers of the Constitution to attempt to limit the powers of government, over men. It worked, after a fashion, But as with most all doings of man, it has produced mixed results, even from the very beginning. Which leads us right back to the real source of the troubles. The wicked heart of man(kind).

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.