Bookmark this blog.
The Dutch Reformed theologian Herman Witsius gave the following praise to King William III for his role at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690:
Surely I shall never forget that day on which the river Boyne in Ireland had like to be distinguished by your fall, though, by the blessing of God, it was ennobled by your victory; for while, according to your wonted attention and care, you went to a nearer view of the enemy’s camp, a cannon ball, leveled at your person, happened to graze your shoulder; a wound, which gave matter of great joy to your enemies, of apprehension to your own people, than of real harm to yourself; a wound, which taught us you was a man, but a man above the common rank of mankind, a man dear to heaven; a wound, in the fine, which, however great, prevented not your performing all the…
View original post 157 more words
Logical Investigations 
Not that I (or anyone) has a dog in this fight anymore, but: a legitimate, if not morally debauched papist, king who had a program for tolerance across the board, or an incestuous sodomite usurper who had not a theological bone in his body? While James may not have been one to celebrate, William was hardly a providential champion, but revealed English harlotry and shamelessness.
LikeLike
Sure, William had his problems. I question James’ toleration, as the Presbyterians were still being hunted. Further, it was illegal to have a Roman Catholic dynasty in England.
LikeLike