Skip to comments.July 4th -- Happy "Presbyterian Rebellion" Day!
Posted on 07/04/2010 2:24:16 PM PDT by Christian_Capitalist
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." 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." 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."
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."
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. "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."
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."
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."
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. The 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."
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."
"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.'"
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."
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."
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."
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.
Great history I never learned in public school, thanks for the ping. :)
“Who were the Catholic Founders ?
Where there many?
Or just Protestants?”
I found this, it has a chart -
Religious Affiliation of the
of the United States of America
Excellent summary of the differences (what few there actually are).
Usually 4 pointers are “ulip’s”
So you are unusual ...
BTW predestination is taught all through scripture..
The Anglicans were Calvinists
Well as far as reformed “theology” goes, one heresy is as bad as another. Macht Nichts.
I just love your happy homepage. The boys fishing is a terrific photograph. 8~)
Dr E., try out the Christian Traditions Selector test that raynearhood has on his profile. Here's how I scored (I'd like to know how the UCoC got in there, tho):
Link: Christian Traditions Selector
The Puritan movement of course included Presbyterians, as well as Congregationalists, and, even Particular Baptists. One cannot pigeon hole the movement as being only Congregationalists... more like, the most serious and radical of Protestant British and European colonists at the time were Calvinistical, and therefore interested in purifying a corrupt Church. And even Anglicans at the time, were very influenced by Calvinism (Anglican Christianity being originally described as the middle ground between Calvinism and Lutheranism (no, not Roman Catholicism).
Officially, the Puritan party originally wanted to stay Anglican, and purify the English Church, but, little by little, serious Calvinists found it impossible to stay...and broke away (even if by just going to America). Presbyterianism after all only refers to the practice of governance by Elders (a concept originally developed by Calvin)...(not fully democratic like Congregationalism, nor hierarchical like Anglicanism or Rome...) which is, after all, a foretaste of Representative Democracy....
Calvinists is a term broader than just English Puritans, as it consists of far more than Englishmen, but, the “Puritan movement” was fully fledged Calvinist...and the most influential movement across denominational lines in pre-revolutionary America.
So close were the Puritan Congregationalists to the theology of Presbyerians, that Congregationalist and Presbyterian pastors would trade off preaching at each other’s churches, or even be hired by one or the other...there really wasn’t all that huge of a gap, in America at least.
Rule of law...(originally thinking of God’s moral laws) applying equally to king or commoner is one of the main subversive elements of Calvinism to monarchy.
Interestingly, I’ve read that in China today, Presbyterianism is a favorite form in highly educated house churches...of course due to many Presbyterian missionaries there (like Eric Liddel) before Mao, but also due to the fact that Calvinist theology gives the most logical base for democratic ideas...
(100%) 1: Presbyterian/Reformed
(84%) 2: Congregational/United Church of Christ
(73%) 3: Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England
(71%) 4: Baptist (Reformed/Particular/Calvinistic)
(68%) 5: Eastern Orthodox
(62%) 6: Lutheran
(48%) 7: Roman Catholic
(44%) 8: Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene
(40%) 9: Church of Christ/Campbellite
(37%) 10: Seventh-Day Adventist
(24%) 11: Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth Brethren/Fundamentalist
(19%) 12: Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God
(17%) 13: Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.)
Practically any figure in the strict and brutal 16th Century (when virtually no one recognized religious tolerance or freedom) can be called a “rigid, control freak” today, and Calvin was never accused, even by his worst enemies of the day, of murder—so you are simply lying about him, sorry.
The Genevan City Council, after months of trials and legal deliberation did execute one man for heresy (Servetus), after consulting with the other Protestant cities and authorities for advice (they all said execute him). Servetus had previously been condemned twice by Roman Catholic courts to death for the same religious offense.
Do we execute heretics today? Of course not, but, that was standard law from the 16th Century and before, everywhere in Europe. That doesn’t make Calvin any “murderer” any more than your local prosecuter who successfully pursues a death penalty case is a “murderer.”
“Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. All great men are bad men.” Acton said that. Usually when it is quoted the third sentence is omitted.
Servetus said that all Trinitarian Christians were "sorcerers" who should be burnt at the stake, every single one of us.
If someone came to my town for the purpose of raising genocidal insurrection against all Trinitarian Christians, I certainly hope that the town sheriff would do something about it.
On to your next slander. OH, WAIT, that's the only argument against Calvin you ever had. (Never mind that cheap, dishonest slanders against the person of John Calvin, do nothing to change the clear Truths of Biblical Predestination which he and Augustine -- another imperfect Christian -- quite rightly preached).
And sometimes a fine cigar is just a fine cigar. I often capitalize whatever words I would emphasize if I were speaking, regardless of orthographic rectitude.
Sorry, Dr. Freud.
Conversely when scripture is watered down and God is reduced to an impotent being knocking helplessly on the "heart's door" hoping that it will be opened, the results are a society that will accept the intrusions of government placidly.
I tried to read a CNN (business) article this morning 100 Great Things About America but quit reading right away. Depressing. What a contrast between what our founders thought was great and what present day Americans think is great!
I am uplifted because of this post and the comments of celebrants who know what to celebrate.
Just makes me want to go out and burn some heretics at the stake in celebration! </sarcasm>
(got any suggestions as to who? :^D)
That just accounts for 104% of the total. Math skills seem to equal theological knowledge here.
(89%) Congregational/United Church of Christ
(73%) Baptist (Reformed/Particular/Calvinistic)
(58%) Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England
(54%) Eastern Orthodox
(39%) Roman Catholic
(38%) Church of Christ/Campbellite
(38%) Seventh-Day Adventist
(32%) Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth Brethren/Fundamentalist
(10%) Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God
(10%) Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.)
That system of points was published as a refutation of the heretical 5 points of Arminian Remonstrance, and are a summation of the judgements rendered at the Synod of Dort in 1619.
It is unfortunate that most folks view Calvinism in context of the 5 points, when in fact Calvinism can be summed up in one. Namely that God completely saves sinners, without any of our help. Some of us just don't realize that we didn't have anything to do with our own salvation. That is solidly Biblical.
I love Boettner too. The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, I believe is his work. Excellent stuff.
We have two infants in our small church’s nursery named Calvin. :)
Obviously, I am not one of these three, and I don't do a lot of Reformed apologetics on FR because there are so many more knowlegeable than I am. I have, however, been much involved in forum apologetics and it is nice to know that the Lord does work through this even though mostly all that you get is nasty comments and bad attitudes. Praise God that He led you to Truth!
Conversely when scripture is watered down and God is reduced to an impotent being knocking helplessly on the "heart's door" hoping that it will be opened, the results are a society that will accept the intrusions of government placidly.
Very well said.
That's great. Our younger son says he'll name his first son Calvin (let us pray his future wife agrees.) 8~)
“The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, I believe is his work. Excellent stuff.”
Yes, sounds so dry, reads so well. Also, “Roman Catholicism” was a very helpful book for me, also by him. It is a critique of Roman Catholicism but is written in a scholarly tone and is not nasty or bashing.
Just don't give the kid a stuffed tiger named Hobbes. ;^8
If Dr. Eck's post says "Charles Carroll had no part in drafting the document nor any of the debates; he just showed up to sign it.", then Of the Delegates who actually met to negotiate the Constitution history recognizes six as actual authors of the Constitution. Of these six none were Presbyterians such as Dr. Eck's grouping -- if one wants to somehow say that only those religious groups that had members who drafted the constitution are American...
Anyway the list of those who did draft the Constituion were:
If one takes Dr. Eck's post about not having a part in drafting the document and just signing it then hmm.... only unitarians, Deists and Episcopalians are true Americans according to that (false) statement.
how can Arminianism be heretical when that is the belief of Pentecostals, Methodists and many Baptists? Are these Pentecostals, Methodists and many Baptists following heretical beliefs?
Belot,an Anabaptist was arrested for passing out tracts in Geneva and also accusing Calvin of excessive use of wine. A man in Geneva who publicly protested against the reformer's doctrine of predestination was flogged at all the crossways of the city and then expelled.
He must have been an egotist, but he was strict -- 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."
no wonder Martin Luther said of Calvin's actions in Geneva, "With a death sentence they solve all argumentation" (Juergan L. Neve, A History of Christian Thought, vol. I, p. 285).
Arminianism denies the efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice.
well, in my humble opinion I've not noted any pentecostals who do that -- and they are Arminians
Calvinists believe that salvation for the elect was completed on the cross and that there is nothing we can add to it, therefore giving full glory to God for that salvation.
Conversely, Arminians believe that Christ only made it possible for us and all of the world to be saved, that it really depends on the individual to accept that salvation, thus elevating the will of man over the sovereignty of God and the efficacy of the blood of Christ.
Out of the 60 you have 3 Catholics --> that's 5% of the signers were Catholics (as compared to 1.6% of the population).
ditto for the numbers of Catholics who served and/or died for Independence -- much higher than their % in society
My guess is that the number of Presbyterian warriors struck a sensitive cord with the British, more so perhaps than their being Calvinists. Presbyterians mostly sprang from Scottish soil, didn’t they? The British and Scottish conflict was an old one. It also surfaced in the Battle of King’s Mountain in South Carolina.