HUGUENOTS-WALLOONS-EUROPE-L Archives
Archiver > HUGUENOTS-WALLOONS-EUROPE > 2003-05 > 1053534871
From:
Subject: Re: [HWE] Were all French Protestants, Huguenots
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 09:34:31 -0700 (PDT)
Hmm David has posed some questions of interest.
There seems to have been many attempts at an answer to
some of David's questions previously. There has also
been an underlying question about just who or what was
who or what.
So first up lets do some reading.
The word 'Protestant' - what does it mean?
According to the Rman Catholic church, which can be a
great source of things Huguenot (remember the word
bias).
So here is how 'New Advent' describe the origins of the
word 'Protestant'
"The Diet of the Holy Roman Empire, assembled at Speyer
in April, 1529, resolved that, according to a decree
promulgated at the Diet of Worms (1524), communities in
which the new religion was so far established that it
could not without great trouble be altered should be
free to maintain it, but until the meeting of the
council they should introduce no further innovations in
religion, and should not forbid the Mass, or hinder
Catholics from assisting thereat.
Against this decree, and especially against the last
article, the adherents of the new Evangel the Elector
Frederick of Saxony, the Landgrave of Hesse, the
Margrave Albert of Brandenburg, the Dukes of Lüneburg,
the Prince of Anhalt, together with the deputies of
fourteen of the free and imperial cities entered a
solemn protest as unjust and impious. The meaning of
the protest was that the dissentients did not intend to
tolerate Catholicism within their borders. On that
account they were called Protestants.
In course of time the original connotation of "no
toleration for Catholics" was lost sight of, and the
term is now applied to, and accepted by, members of
those Western Churches and sects which, in the
sixteenth century, were set up by the Reformers in
direct opposition to the Catholic Church. The same man
may call himself Protestant or Reformed: the term
Protestant lays more stress on antagonism to Rome; the
term Reformed emphasizes adherence to any of the
Reformers. Where religious indifference is prevalent,
many will say they are Protestants, merely to signify
that they are not Catholics. In some such vague,
negative sense, the word stands in the new formula of
the Declaration of Faith to be made by the King of
England at his coronation; viz.: "I declare that I am a
faithful Protestant". During the debates in Parliament
it was observed that the proposed formula effectively
debarred Catholics from the throne, whilst it committed
the king to no particular creed, as no man knows what
the creed of a faithful Protestant is or should be."
Sounds like a reasonable story to me at least.
So! who came first, 'Protestant' or 'Huguenot' ?
A reasonably easier question to answer one would
imagine.
Martin Luther:- Born on 10 November, 1483 and died at
Eisleben,Germany on 18 February, 1546.
In short he used the modern technology of the printing
press to put out his thoughts on how the Catholic
church should be reformed, or, he was one of the more
public 'Protestors'
Ulrich Zwingli:- born at Wildhaus in Switzerland, 1
January, 1484 and died 11 October, 1531. Younger by a
year than Luther but also "Protested' although it seems
that he wanted some major changes, so much so that it
could be said that he led the way for a new faith
altogether. (Ulrich had a slight double standard in
some of his thoughts and ways. Particularly when he
preached celibacy but did not practice such) Ah! the
ways of the flesh.
Hmm maybe that is for another topic, Double standards
and the Huguenot ?
Back to the point.
And then to John Calvin, born in Picardy, France, 10
July, 1509, and died at Geneva, 27 May, 1564.
Due to the age difference he was to never meet Luther
and so we can suggest that if those who listened
directly, and acted on Luthers words, were 'Protestors'
and those who followed Calvin in France were known as
'Huguenot' then one of Davids questions is answered.
'Protestant' came before 'Huguenot'
Just to clear something up a little of the history of
the 'Anglican' church.
"Pope Honorius III, in 1218, in his Bull to King
Alexander speaks of the Scottish Church (Ecclesia
Scotticana) as "being immediately subject to the
Apostolic See" (Papal Letters I, 60).
The abbots and priors of England in their letter to
Innocent IV, in 1246, declared that the English Church
(Ecclesia Anglicana) is "a special member of the Most
Holy Church of Rome" [Matthew Paris (Rolls Series), IV,
531].
In 1413 Archbishop Arundel, with the assent of
Convocation, affirmed against the Lollards the faith of
the English Church in a number of test articles,
including the Divine institution of the Papacy and the
duty of all Christians to render obedience to it
(Wilkins, Concilia, III, 355).
In 1521, only thirteen years before the breach, John
Clerk, the English Ambassador at Rome, was able to
assure the Pope in full consistory that England was
second to no country in Christendom, "not even to Rome
itself", in the "service of God: and of the Christian
Faith, and in the obedience due to the Most Holy Roman
Church" (Clerks' oration, ed. Jerome Emser)."
(Source:- The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume I)
The 'breach' being mentioned is that of Henry VIII and
his little moment in religious history.
So! Yes, what we now call the 'Anglican' church did
come prior to the Huguenot church.
Were all French Protestants, Huguenots?
By golly gosh no sir.
Even if we stay with the time period of Luther to
Calvin. Some were Lutherans or followed Erastianism
(named after Thomas Lieber who liked the fancy name of
Eratus)
We will still find that many French folk were either
Lutheran etc., or Huguenot. It would seem that those
who were what is now termed 'Calvinists' were the
orginators of Huguenots.
I mentioned previously how words have changed there use
over the centuries. The word 'Protestant' and
'Huguenot' appear to have undergone such a change as
well.
Kind Regards,
Peter Leroy
This thread: