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.
From “The Three Musketeers”
“As it was a time of war between the Catholics and the Huguenots, and as
he saw the Catholics exterminate the Huguenots and the Huguenots
exterminate the Catholics—all in the name of religion—he adopted a
mixed belief which permitted him to be sometimes Catholic, sometimes a
Huguenot. Now, he was accustomed to walk with his fowling piece on his
shoulder, behind the hedges which border the roads, and when he saw a
Catholic coming alone, the Protestant religion immediately prevailed in
his mind. He lowered his gun in the direction of the traveler; then,
when he was within ten paces of him, he commenced a conversation which
almost always ended by the traveler’s abandoning his purse to save his
life. It goes without saying that when he saw a Huguenot coming, he felt
himself filled with such ardent Catholic zeal that he could not
understand how, a quarter of an hour before, he had been able to have
any doubts upon the superiority of our holy religion. For my part,
monsieur, I am Catholic—my father, faithful to his principles, having
made my elder brother a Huguenot.”
“And what was the end of this worthy man?” asked d’Artagnan.
“Oh, of the most unfortunate kind, monsieur. One day he was surprised in
a lonely road between a Huguenot and a Catholic, with both of whom he
had before had business, and who both knew him again; so they united
against him and hanged him on a tree. Then they came and boasted of
their fine exploit in the cabaret of the next village, where my brother
and I were drinking.”
“And what did you do?” said d’Artagnan.
“We let them tell their story out,” replied Mousqueton. “Then, as in
leaving the cabaret they took different directions, my brother went and
hid himself on the road of the Catholic, and I on that of the Huguenot.
Two hours after, all was over; we had done the business of both,
admiring the foresight of our poor father, who had taken the precaution
to bring each of us up in a different religion.”
The bit about Caflix is just another example of liberal spin.
Exactly — Spaniards versus Frenchies.
By placing pieces of writing which you characterize as "a shot", and an "attack"? Pieces of paper with words written upon them? I'm glad you also said it was a polemic. That's more like it, if we're in any way trying to reach truth.
"So, instead of discussing, the went to attack the Catholic majority ..."
Attacking them with words written on pieces of paper?
Aye-yi-yi, well lets have us some solemn processions, lets have the King walk under the very awning which normally was carried aloft over the chalice & host during solemn religious processions, then, let's round up a half dozen of these who "attack" us with challenges to our most christian church, AND BURN THEM ALIVE. After having offered a cash reward for their capture, of course.
Here, let me fix this sentence to bring it back towards quieter sanity;
>This polemic was an attack [a polemic] and the Huguenots started this [suffered] retaliation.<
To say it they way you do, is to have the Catholics of that day be allowed to wipe their bloody hands on their victims and say "we are not responsible in the least for what we do, including murder, because Jesus loves us, but He can't stand these people who dared to openly oppose our religious/political system".
If you wish to speak of possible parallels between 16th century French Protestants and today's Islamists, please START ANOTHER THREAD. But ask yourself first --- who is it that says "there is no compulsion in religion", yet does the opposite in practice? Who in the past? (how'd that work out for them?) Who presently?
Hey! Hold on there a second buddy. Those statements which you are trying to characterize as what I offered as "history", were in answer to a question YOU asked, as to "what difference would it have made" concerning the reasons behind the slaughters, and what declarations were made at the time by Menendez concerning the same.
It made a difference at the time, being it was as I said. Europeans both Catholic and Protestant were appalled when details of the goings-on reached them.
Wikipedia is hardly "all historical accounts"
I never said that they were, yet even with only grabbing from that convenient source, it's far better than than what you yourself bring in establishing points key to your "version of truth" which is by and large sophistry and opinion, backed by wind.
good comparison
If you BD, want to talk about the topic of the thread, do that, instead why did you start with post 84 on Huguenots terror?
Like in Salem, eh? ok
Let's add in Calwinos to the long list of those who do...
you brought it up. Start a thread.
To say it the way you, BlueDragon, do, is to have the Huguenots of that day be allowed to wipe their bloody hands on their victims and say “we are not responsible in the least for what we do, including murder, because Jesus loves us, and made us elite Brahmins but He can’t stand these people who dared to openly oppose our religious/political system called Calvinism”
go back to your first post 88.... Now if you want to talk about how Calvinists were like Jihadis — you start your own thread and we’ll join and point out how they supported the Ottomon Moslems in Hungary and were fighting against Christians in the Siege of Vienna...
go back to your first post 88.... Now if you want to talk about how Calvinists were like Jihadis — you start your own thread and we’ll join and point out how they supported the Ottomon Moslems in Hungary and were fighting against Christians in the Siege of Vienna...oh and how they went to South Africa to inaugurate apartheid, and in the way they participated in the kulturkampf in germany?
With yourself having added the present Moslem portion, I found it a bit much. To much junk all smashed together --
The paragraph you think(?) I missed does nothing to dismiss what I've been saying here otherwise. If one cannot cope with it, or refuses to, then sorry charlie, I simply must focus on the core element, the real crux of the matter, rather than the "accidents" as to how it all came about, however fascinating and even helpful to understanding the larger setting such information may be, particularly when I suspect the information is being introduced as diversionary tactic.
I'd much rather focus on core elements. If we cannot find those upon which we may agree, then build upon, and go from there, then real communication will continue to be quite difficult.
You rephrased it;
so, the Huguenots started the war against their nation, traitors to their nation and also started attacks on their fellow citizens...
Started "attacks" on their fellow citizens? No, they did not, unless one is afraid of [certain specific portions of] an idea that what one has been taught to unquestioningly believe is an "attack".
Here, try this one for size;
Looking at that lengthy list of other "items" you have brought up, I can't help but to think that is some form of attempt to drag the discussion which has been going on here ~ off into the bushes.
It's an age-old debating tactic, but highly transparent.
Looks like you could start about four threads there at least. Maybe you could ping all your buddies and get a real hate-them-Calvinists-they-are-the-cause-of-all-ills hatefest going? Ya'll have fun, but no thanks, (unless there were a lot of good links leading to interesting reading, heheh...)
incredible -- were you destined to ask that?
Read my first post
I don't agree with this reformer from Geneva was the father of modern liberty as well as the intellectual founding father of America, -- that's hyperbole. Yes, Calvin's revolt against rulers (perhaps in tune with Swiss concepts) had an impact on the French and American revolutions, but the father or founding father? No.
Also, Religious liberty owes it much respect is false -- Geneva was as merciless in rooting out those who didn't follow it's state religion as Lutherans or Catholics were.
if we talk about religious liberty, later Anglicanism has a higher position, but only from the 1800s.
Rather, I would put the concept of religious liberty to the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth (and no, this was not because the Poles were Catholics) which had religious liberty for Catholics, Orthodox, Jews, Lutherans, Muslims, Armenian Orthodox, Unitarians and Calvinists too --> the Calvinists did compromise their position by supporting the invading Swedes during the Potop. This resulted in a sharp decline of Calvinism after the Swedes were kicked out -- not due to government pressure so much as people leaving a "foreign influence". Lutheranism wasn't seen as supporting foreigners so much either
Anyway, I digress -- Calvinism was not associated with civil liberty in the 1700s, neither was Catholicism or Orthodoxy or Lutheranism or Anglicanism. Mennonites yes, but they weren't associated with any nation state.
incredible -- were you destined to ask that?
Read my third post
Reformation-era Europe should NOT be read purely in the context of religion. For instance the 30 years war in Germany. That seems on the outset to be Catholic v/s Lutheran, but then one sees that Catholic France was fighting alongside Protestants???
Then one sees Lutheran princelings crushing baptist etc. serfs
What was going on?
You cannot read this without reading how the Holy Roman Empire was Catholic and the little Lords, Dukes etc. in northern Europe used the Reformation to declare their independence
you cannot read it without reading how France used the opportunity to weaken the Holy Roman Empire (i.e. how West Francia stole a march over East Francia) and how the Turks used this European turmoil to their own advantage
The city-state of Geneva was in effect, a police state, ruled by a Consistory of five pastors and twelve lay elders, with the bloodless figure of the dictator looming over all, John Calvin....Sources quoted in Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church, vol. 8:
Frail, thin, short, and lightly bearded, with ruthless, penetrating eyes, he was humorless and short-tempered. The slightest criticism enraged him. Those who questioned his theology he called “pigs,” “asses,” “riffraff,” “dogs,” “idiots,” and “stinking beasts.” One morning he found a poster on his pulpit accusing him of “Gross Hypocrisy.” A suspect was arrested. No evidence was produced, but he was tortured day and night for a month till he confessed. Screaming with pain, he was lashed to a wooden stake. Penultimately, his feet were nailed to the wood; ultimately he was decapitated.
- Belot, an Anabaptist was arrested for passing out tracts in Geneva and also accusing Calvin of excessive use of wine. With his books and tracts burned, he was banished from the city and told not to return on pain of hanging (J.L. Adams, The Radical Reformation, pp. 597-598).
- Jacques Gruent was racked and then executed for calling Calvin a hypocrite
- A man who publicly protested against the reformer's doctrine of predestination was flogged at all the crossways of the city and then expelled.
- Calvin's Letter to the Marquis Paet, chamberlain to the King of Navarre, 1561. "Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels [Anabaptists and others], who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."
NOTE: he was as bad as anyone else in his day. He was no "liberator".
Let's see what you talk about:
1. Huguenots
2. Spanish-French wars
3. Spanish attacks on their enemy, the French
to which I replied how much of this was purely religious and how much of it was purely political? the Spanish have no love for the French even then -- and the French were trying to muscle in on what Spain considered THEIRS, the Americas
Secondly, note what you yourself posted launching a surprise dawn attack on the Fort Caroline garrison-> an attack on a garrison. This was war
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.
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.